


S AeA 






ey 








Pa ga 













X OF PR 





OCT 16 1924 





y RN 
% < 
COL ogicar semis 


Division BS | BS 


aes ' N 4 = 





ih Re 
: a) . : : rip he vi) 


Seat) 


i i : ; Nes 
ih ital 


es 
Pall 
ee iT a? 
Re 
i Fr) 20 : : 


iawn 


NE 
hy 


seg c 
Nar urs, ee 

; ey (rr 
yt : 





THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 








THE GENIUS OF ISRA 


A Reading of Hebrew Scriptures 
Prior to the Exile 


BY 
CARLETON NOYES 





BOSTON AND NEW YORK 
HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY 
The Riverside Press Cambridge 
1924 


COPYRIGHT, 1924, BY CARLETON NOYES 


ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 


The Riverside Press 
CAMBRIDGE . MASSACHUSETTS 
PRINTED IN THE U.S.A, 


TO 
MY WIFE 









bee he i ei y 
Saas Ay 1 





. é ’ 5 ¥ au ¥ 
} Ve OT Dente 


rd eae a pa 
apne df ie 


‘ 
\ 
‘ 
) 
i f 
iD 
Bi 
i 
. i d 
A 1 
a 
Le ’ 
nt } 
an : 
i 
tg9 »f as 
rr 74 ri fi ’ 
' ly i 
\ 





PREFACE 


Tue Old Testament read consecutively is not at once easy to under- 
stand. Itself is not a single book, but an aggregate of many diverse 
books. Each of these in its turn is highly composite: side by side are 
ranged passages, deriving from widely separate epochs, but without 
evident distinction in the text. So, for example, the first chapter of 
Genesis was written some four hundred years later than the second; 
both hold a narrative of the Creation, but they are very different in 
content and point of view. Moreover, the conditions of life from 
which the Hebrew scriptures proceeded are strange to us; basic ele- 
ments of the books, their background, their allusions, are obscure. 
The world of the ancient East, in which Israel moved, is far less than 
the world of Greece and Rome a part of our inherited culture and 
familiar knowledge. 

In the following pages I have tried to re-create the people and the 
civilization of which large portions of the Old Testament are the 
fragmentary but immensely engaging record. Israel, as a nation 
among nations, reached its term with the Exile in 586 B.c. After 
fifty years of captivity in Babylon, the people returning to Jerusalem 
founded the Jewish church: the Israelite kingdom gave place to the 
theocracy of Judaism. It was in the centuries before the Exile that 
the character of Israel received its special mould. As the power and 
the beauty of the Hebrew scriptures have their source deep in the 
racial temper of the people, it has seemed possibly rewarding to at- 
tempt, with broken and fugitive threads drawn from the complex 
fabric of the scriptures, to weave a pattern of the conditions and the 
events that gave peculiar form and impress to the genius of early 
Israel. 

Vii 


PREFACE 


An interpretation rather than a history, this book aims to portray 
the Israelites as they were in the flesh, at work and at play, in the 
actual circumstances of their everyday experience, and in their re- 
lations with contemporary nations. The genius of Israel was su- 
premely a genius for religion. But beneath the passion for God and 
his righteousness beat the urge of human striving for the merely 
human goods of life. If it was granted this people to mount the 
heights, the path thither led along the ways of men. 

Neighbored by Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, the Israelites were a 
small people in a great world. Their gains in conquest and compe- 
tence of statecraft alike were secondary; equally meagre were their 
material accomplishment and skill in the plastic arts. To show the 
littleness of Israel, however, is to accentuate the magnitude of its 
real achievement. Lighting a candle does not illuminate the sun. 
Rather, a vast darkness, which the sun floods with sudden glory, 
reveals the true marvel of its splendor. 

My indebtedness to the labors of many scholars will be amply 
manifest; perhaps I need not specify in detail. Yet in a field where 
experts are so little in accord, I cannot hope to have avoided errors 
both of direct statement and of inference. Certainty of fact here 
seems impossible to attain; and notably for the earlier periods, new 
archeological discoveries may any day compel changes in currently 
accepted views. In general, however, I have simply tried to catch 
the spirit of things, as they moulded and expressed Israel’s genius. 
My desire has been less to affirm or certify than to evoke. Whatever 
the success of my effort to make the Israelites live again with the 
warmth and presentness of timeless reality, I should like to contrib- 
ute to a fuller understanding and richer appreciation of the Old 
Testament. 

My thanks are due the Oxford University Press for permission to 

viii 


PREFACE 


use the text of the English Revised Version; in a few instances I 
have varied a word or phrase. To Mr. Carl Engel, of Washington, 
D.C., I am heartily grateful for his friendly and stimulating inter- 
est in my book while it was in process. Mr. Willard C. Jackson, of 
Cambridge, has kindly assisted me with the proofs. I owe an espe- 
cial debt of gratitude to Robert H. Pfeiffer, Ph.D., Instructor in 
Semitic Languages in Harvard University, who has given me un- 
sparingly of his knowledge and his time in many difficult places. 
With trenchant helpful criticism he has read the book in manuscript, 
and in proof keen-sightedly; and he has generously prepared the 
Indexes. 
CAMBRIDGE, THANKSGIVING Day, 1923 










ult Wi ih f uf iy iY r i, os i as ie 4 f f ide i ae - iy en Bee ie o 


ae ine ny = 
i ee my a ’ ree i 








CONTENTS 


. BEFoRE DAWN 

. Out oF THE DESERT 

. SHEPHERDS IN EGypt 

. WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 

. THE Promisep LAND 

. DAYBREAK 

. THERE WAS NO King IN ISRAEL 
. BUILDING THE NATION 

. Hico Noon 

. Tue Kina’s PEACE 

. Dtvipep ISRAEL 

. JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 

. SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 
. JUSTICE AND Law 

. PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 

. THE GREAT PROPHETS 

. YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


. THe FLOWER oF IsRAEL’S GENIUS 


INDEX 


106 
118 
137 
156 
188 
212 
236 
262 
307 
325 
3338 
385 
406 
435 







<i Sh ae 
mg : Soar eae 
~~. 

> 


ee am, 
sae Ae 
aa 


aa 
. 





eo, 
7 . 
rs 


vy 
lf 

; & 

ix " 
ae! 
Ay ve é | Mg 

Pu > i i) 

a i 

rs i : ‘ im 

1% 


ig 


OS iy 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


I 
BEFORE DAWN 


WueEn Egypt was at the height of its immemorial glory, and the Em- 
pire of Babylonia, after increasing centuries of splendor and domin- 
ion, had yielded to the attack of mountaineers out of the farther east, 
some rude nomad tribes, emerging from the Arabian desert, with time 
and by unknown ways moved toward the kindlier fields of Canaan. 

A small amazing land of contrasts, of forbidding slopes and level 
invitation, Canaan lay across the caravan tracks that skirted the des- 
ert on the road from Babylonia to Egypt. Tenanted by a shepherd 
and farmer people, it was but a meeting-point of the two great em- 
pires — debatable ground to bring them together in conflict, or a 
buffer to keep them apart. While up and down its narrow length 
surged and ebbed the tides of world-ambitious conquest, itself not a 
nation but a territory, Canaan owned the suzerainty of one mighty 
state and then another, until at last the shepherd Hebrews, wan- 
dering children of a later day, entered in to possess it. 

Between the affluent green valley of the Nile and the garden plains 
of Euphrates and Tigris, are strewn in vast distances the brown 
sands and desolate impenetrable steppes of the Arabian desert, at far 
intervals watered by oases. The wastes bear men abundantly, but 
cannot nourish them in the same measure. After the lapse of a mil- 
lennium, within which period is fulfilled a secular climatic alternation 
of moisture and aridity, the oases are no longer able to support their 
burden. And the nomad herdsmen swarm forth, as though with 

1 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


concerted action, in an immense migration, east and north and west, 
seeking sustenance and eager to reap where they have not sown. 

So it happened that, about the middle of the fourth millennium be- 
fore Christ, the desert pushed forth over its bounds a multitude of 
wandering tribes. Some made their way eastward to the Euphrates 
valley, and there establishing themselves, they absorbed a civiliza- 
tion won by another race. Other tribes, perhaps, found grazing for 
their flocks on the banks of the Nile, and mingling with peoples 
already there, helped to form the stock of the dynastic Egyptians. 
Still others were carried into Canaan; usurping its wells and fertile 
lands, they passed from nomadic to settled agricultural life. 

In another thousand years, about 2500 -B.c., a wave of shifting 
tribes flowed out of the desert, breaking in upon Syria and Canaan to 
the north and west, or pouring eastward into Mesopotamia and 
thence into Babylonia. In this movement came those tribes who pos- 
sessed themselves of the seaboard, built Sidon and Tyre, and created 
the maritime power of the Phoenicians. Of the wanderers who 
reached the Euphrates valley, some settled in the city of Babylon, 
which now, though tradition ascribes its founding to Sargon I centu- 
ries before, rises to political importance. The dynasty established by 
these newcomers, preeminent among them the illustrious Hammu- 
rabi, made Babylon the ruling city of the Empire. Following this 
“‘Amoritic” migration, the next immense movement out of the des- 
ert, the “Aramean,” about 1500 B.c., brought the Hebrews into the 
light of historic cognizance, as they pressed against the gates of the 
land upon which they were to set their unique and enduring seal. 


In the far childhood of a race, time is long and change comes 
slowly. The reaches of history in its beginnings tell off centuries 


where later ages count by years. So it was that only with the passing 
2 


BEFORE DAWN 


of unnumbered generations, a certain few tribes of many issuing from 
the ancestral desert came to recognize among themselves a closer 
kinship and more definite bond. Again a lapse of centuries before 
these tribes combined to form a people and woke to the consciousness 
of nationality. It was yet another hundred years and more, when 
Israel had chosen a king to rule over it, that lettered men began to 
record their people’s history. 

The Hebrew tribes won a home in Canaan after long wanderings 
and manifold vicissitudes. Of ancestral fortunes the remembrance 
lived in tribal songs and legends transmitted from generation to gen- 
eration. Woven into the narratives compiled centuries afterwards, 
these precious survivals furnished substance for such history of patri- 
archal adventure as the writers could command. At best they but 
hint vague possibilities. One account, formulated by priestly writers 
after the Exile, sweeps back two thousand years to bring Abraham 
from Ur of the Chaldees; according to this interpretation, the remote 
ancestors of the tribes that became the nation Israel drifted from the 
desert eastward to the Euphrates valley as part of the Amoritic mi- 
gration. The earliest narratives, however, written in Judah during or 
soon after the reign of Solomon, place the first home of the Hebrews 
in northern Mesopotamia, or Aram. These traditions, therefore, agree 
better with the probable fact, for it is reasonably certain that the 
Hebrews came in force with the Aramean migration. In the Judahite 
stories, the land of Abram’s nativity is Haran, in northwestern Meso- 
potamia. There too, in the house of his brother Nahor, the patriarch 
finds a wife for his son Isaac. To the “land of the children of the 
East”’ Jacob flees from Esau’s vengeance; he enters the service of his 
uncle Laban, in Haran, and takes Laban’s two daughters to wife. 
So, also, later Israelites were taught to say, “A wandering Aramean 
was my father.” 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


If indeed they touched along their way these ancient centres of 
civilization, whether in Babylonia or in Aram, the tribes from which 
were sprung the ancestors of Israel were nurtured in the desert before 
memory began. Here was wrought a racial fibre which distinguished 
Israel to the end; and the people never quite lost the recollection of 
its desert origin. To the eldest sons of the patriarchal family, to Ish- 
mael, first born of Abraham, and to Esau, older brother of Jacob, tra- 
dition assigned the part of nomads. Ina later age, the narratives 
of Israel’s beginnings reflect, though waveringly, the distant past in 
something of its true image, not by force of cunning fancy or con- 
scious literary skill, but because the influences of primal conditions 
persisted in communal memory and were still active in Israel’s man- 
ner of life. Thus the nomad tribal system, extended to the compre- 
hensive structure of the state, determined the nation’s social and po- 
litical organization. Every family, clan, and tribe, even when merged 
to constitute one people, kept the sense of itself as a distinct unit. 
The national God was the God of the tribes, but now accorded a larger 
sovereignty, for his development concurred with the widening inter- 
ests of his worshippers. Moreover, the specific personal quality of 
Israel owed much to its inheritance of the desert, which illumines 
though it cannot wholly explain the peculiar genius of this people. 
The racial temper, of which Israel’s later achievements were in part 
the expression, was forged through measureless time in the formative 
period of youth by the struggle for bare subsistence in the waste 
spaces of unfriendly earth. The nomad character is Israel’s charac- 
ter in the making. For the desert, niggard, harsh, and inaccessible 
except to its own sons, does not change; and in the isolation imposed 
by environment, but accepted by the loyal tribesman as his primary 
obligation to his group, the strain of race continues pure. So in the 
nomad Arabs of to-day live again the ancestral Hebrews.) 

4 


BEFORE DAWN 


The basic social unit in the desert is the tribe, a group varying in 
numbers, of families bound together by a real or supposed commu- 
nity of blood, and tracing their descent from a common ancestor. So, 
tradition ran, the whole family of Israel were born of Jacob. Tribes 
originally distinct may unite, if the accidents or exigencies of desert 
life compel, in a bond of brotherhood, as happened actually with the 
tribes who became the “children of Israel”; or a tribe may subdivide, 
as Lot is represented to have separated from Abraham because the 
land could not sustain them together. Families and clans unite in a 
single distinct group by stern necessity, to assure their very exist- 
ence; for all other tribes are active enemies if they are not acknowl- 
edged friends. Ishmael, ancient exemplar of the Bedawy, is a “wild 
ass of a man,” whose home is the wilderness and the salt land his 
dwelling; his hand is against every man and every man’s hand 
against him. The security of the individual lies wholly in his con- 
stant adherence to his group; cut off from his tribe, he is deprived of 
all protection. So Yahweh compassionately sets his mark upon the 
outlaw Cain to safeguard him, lest any finding him should kill him. 
Over and around this practical necessity, the children of the wastes 
weave the conception of the bond of blood as the cohesive force, 
giving it an ideal interpretation. Into the community sprung from 
the one ancestor, strangers may be received by adoption and by 
participating in blood-rites. By the same token, based in the same 
concept, the exaction of blood-revenge is the supreme coercion. 
“At the hand of every man’s brother, will I require the life of 
man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” 
The ordinance of Yahweh but echoes ineluctable desert custom. 
Because of the reality to the nomads of the blood-bond and its 
efficacy in practice, it was easy for Israel, long after the tribes had 
been welded into a nation, to maintain itself consciously as a people 


5) 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


apart, seemingly chosen from the beginning to the fulfilment of a 
special destiny. 

As all social unity is thus rooted in kinship, so every social obliga- 
tion derives directly from it. By nature arrogant and uncontrollable, 
yet the nomad willingly subordinates his personal concerns to the 
welfare of the group, for his adherence is not the surrender of his lib- 
erty, but rather its guarantee. Toward strangers, because of his un- 
bounded pride of race and family, he is the haughtiest of aristocrats. 
But within the tribe prevails the spirit of equality. As all members 
share alike the common tasks in work and war, all enjoy the same im- 
portance. This sense of the perfect equality of all within the group 
the Hebrews carried with them from the desert into Canaan, and it 
survived long in Israel. To their innate conviction of the absolute 
dignity and worth of the individual was perhaps due the fact that the 
Israelites were never subjected to a despotism, such as ruled Egypt 
and the empires of the Euphrates-Tigris valley. At one period of its 
history only, Israel approached the sovereignty exercised by its great 
and ancient neighbors west and east. David laid the foundations 
of a despotism. Solomon, worldly, ambitious, and loving splendor, 
strove with the resources which his father had made possible to play 
the rdle of magnificent potentate. When the government passed to a 
weak and unwise son, the momentum was lost; and the kingdom fell 
apart. Israel and Judah, divided against themselves, reverted to a 
humbler station. 

The chieftain of the tribe is the sheikh, chosen by his fellows for his 
eminence and fitness. There is no right of primogeniture; the sheikh’s 
successor, though usually one of his sons or other member of his fam- 
ily, is elected as being the most capable. More than once Israel 
availed itself of desert practice in the choosing of its king. Leader in 
war, yet in everyday affairs the sheikh is rather counsellor than auto- 

6 


BEFORE DAWN 


crat. As judge, the tribesmen submit to his decrees, though he is 
without power to enforce them. The execution of justice rests with 
the group. The will of the tribe is the supreme law; custom is the ul- 
timate authority. “It is not wont so to be done.” Tribal public 
opinion finds voice in sentences of praise or blame, perhaps moulded 
to rhythmic form and given currency. So Deborah celebrates the 
governors in Israel who offered themselves willingly to war against 
Sisera, and she taunts the laggard clans that came not to the help of 
Yahweh against the mighty. As but the prime representative of all 
his fellows, the sheikh wields an influence only commensurate with his 
wealth, the magnitude of his family, and his own personal qualities. 
It was centuries in Israel before the sheikh was transformed into a 

king. Moses, Joshua, the ‘‘ Judges,”’ and the first king Saul bore the 
character of tribal leader. Of the Bedawy chieftain in his original 
setting, with a touch of swagger in his dignity, Hebrew legend has 
preserved a precious image. Lamech, flushed with triumph, compar- 
ing himself to his own advantage with a rival chieftain eminent for 
his fierceness, declaims expansively before his admiring womenfolk: 

Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; 

Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: 

For I have slain a man for wounding me, 

And a young man for bruising me: 

If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, 

Truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold. 
The sheikh in gentler aspect is figured in Abraham. He is rich in 
flocks and herds, and has many servants. Honorable and generous 
when dealing with his nephew Lot, he is crafty when opposed to 
strangers: the guile of a half-truth, accepted in good faith by the 
Pharaoh and by Abimelech, brings him successfully out of his diffi- 
culties — to the manifest satisfaction of the narrator! He is the per- 
fection of courtesy in paying sheikhly homage to his guests. The 

7 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL ~ 


nomad is superb in the part of host, fulfilling the eternally sacred ob- 
ligation of hospitality. One of the most charming sketches wrought 
into the Israelite narratives is the picture of the amiable sheikh, sud- 
denly overtaken in the leisure of the daily round by the arrival of un- 
expected visitors, and busying himself without loss of dignity to do 
the honors of the occasion. 


And Yahweh appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, as he 
sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; and he lift up his eyes 
and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him: and when he 
saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed him- 
self to the earth, and said, My lord, if now I have found favor in thy 
sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: let now a little 
water be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the 
tree: and I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your heart; 
after that ye shall pass on: forasmuch as ye are come to your servant. 
And they said, So do, as thou hast said. And Abraham hastened into 
the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of 
fine meal, knead it, and make cakes. And Abraham ran unto the 
herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto the serv- 
ant; and he hasted to dress it. And he took butter, and milk, and 
the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by 
them under the tree, and they did eat. 


The part played by Sarah in this scene and in the narrative follow- 
ing implies that the women of the desert are allowed a certain relative 
independence. The duty of the men is to fight and assure the main- 
tenance of the tribe; the petty drudgery of the camp falls to the 
women. They prepare the meals, fetch water for the tent, and water 
the flocks. Abraham’s servant, sent to find a wife for Isaac, meets 
Rebekah coming out at evening to draw at the well. Rachel tends 
her father’s sheep; at the well where she goes to water them, Jacob 
has his first sight of her. So Moses, too, fleeing to Midian, meets Zip- 


porah among the seven daughters of Reuel, when they come to the 
8 


BEFORE DAWN 


well and fill the troughs to water their father’s flock. In primitive 
conditions, where daily necessities call to varied occupations outside 
the tent as within it, women are permitted a greater freedom of move- 
ment than in the more centred life of towns. Although they are held 
to be the property of the father or the husband, yet within the tribe, as 
among kindred, they are not guarded with the jealous watchfulness 
which in the East a more complex society demands. Rebekah is por- 
trayed as a woman of individuality and resourcefulness. While she is 
yet a girl, her opinion is sought by her elders regarding a choice of 
husband; not until she comes into the presence of her betrothed does 
she assume a veil. She goes, presumably alone and of her own initia- 
tive, to consult the oracle of Yahweh concerning her expected child. 
She shows herself cleverer than her husband, devises an elaborate 
stratagem, and outwits him to the advantage of her favorite son. In 
Hagar, the Arabian handmaid of Sarah, and in Jael, wife of Heber the 
Kenite, the woman of the primeval desert survives immortally. 

The stories of Hagar, in Genesis 16, and of Jael, in Judges 5, are 
woven of the oldest strands of Hebrew legend. With the sharp brev- 
ity of ancient story-telling craft, Hagar is pictured as a proud-spirited 
Bedawy woman, who, though chance has made her a slave, is no less 
absolute than her impetuous mistress. When the fortune of tribal 
life turns in her favor and she is about to bear a son to Abraham, she 
does not hesitate to assert herself, as she thus wins advantage over 
the childless wife. Rather than suffer ill-treatment at Sarah’s hand, 
she flees to her native wilderness; there at a spring she meets a god 
who utters a prophetic sentence upon the son that is to be. The fate- 
ful words, spoken in poetic measure, are tense with the unbridled 
spirit of the wastes. Hagar recognizes the deity of the spring — 
whom the compilers of Israel’s traditions transformed into Yahweh 
— and she calls the god by name, EI roi. 

9 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


A significant contrast to this early legend is the parallel account in 
Genesis 21, which took shape much later, and reflects the point of 
view of a people no longer at home in the desert. Here the emphasis, 
as suits the sensibility which civilization develops, falls upon the 
wretchedness of Hagar’s lot in being cast out into the desert, a vague 
region of danger and deprivation. The high-mettled Bedawy woman 
becomes here the unfortunate rejected slave-mother, doomed to see 
her son perish in the wilderness. The pride of the old legend in the 
defiant spirit of the desert strain yields to a tenderer mood of pity. 
The narrative has kept true, however, some traits of family life of 
the ancient nomad tribe. Abraham makes a great feast on the day 
that Isaac is weaned. The mother, seeing the son of the slave-woman 
at play, becomes jealous for the future of her own child. In his per- 
plexity, Abraham is admonished of God as to adjusting the conten- 
tion between the rival mothers. 

And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread and a 
skin of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and 
gave her the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wan- 
dered in the wilderness of Beer-sheba. And the water in the skin was 
spent, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs. And she went, 
and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bow- 
shot: for she said, Let me not look upon the death of the child. ... 
And God heard the voice of the lad. ... And God opened her eyes, 
and she saw a well of water; and she went and filled the skin with 


water, and gave the lad drink. And God was with the lad, and he 
grew; and he dwelt in the wilderness, and became a bowman. 


The story of Jael likewise is preserved in parallel accounts, in the 
ancient Song of Deborah, and in the prose narrative of the fourth 
chapter of Judges. The poem, the older and contemporary version of 
the episode, is more vivid; the prose account more explicit: the char- 
acter depicted in both is the same. Jael is a figure out of Israel’s he- 

10 


BEFORE DAWN 


roic age. To the hardening influences of her desert training she owes 
the power of resolution that nerves her to her terrible deed. Eternal 
watchfulness against sudden danger has made her quick to think and 
to act. The most sacred, most imperative law of the desert does not 
bind her toward an enemy. She triumphs by a union of guile and 
force. Feigning courtesy, she bids the fleeing Sisera to find asy- 
lum and rest in her tent. True to the law of hospitality which she 
is about to violate supremely, she gives him milk to drink, and 
covers him with a rug. With practised hand, for pegging the tent 
is woman’s business, and with taut sinews, she grasps the hammer 
and the tent-pin. 

And she went softly unto him, and smote the pin into his temples, 
and it pierced through into the ground; for he was in a deep sleep; 
so he swooned and died. And, behold, as Barak pursued Sisera, Jael 
came out to meet him, and said unto him, Come, and I will show thee 


the man whom thou seekest. And he came unto her; and, behold, Sis- 
era lay dead, and the tent-pin was in his temples. 


Of such fibre was Israel fashioned in the beginning. 


The ancient desert temper was slow to yield to the relaxing influ- 
ences which awaited Israel in Canaan. Few peoples have kept their 
racial character intact throughout millennia, as have the Arabs, or so 
little modified by stress and dispersion as have the Jews. For all the 
conditions of life in the wastes make for extreme conservatism. Te- 
nacious of old custom by nature, the nomad finds little occasion for 
change in manner of life or habits of thought. Tribes which are 
thrust forward to the edges of the desert submit in a measure to the 
assimilating forces that reach them from civilization. But the transi- 
tion from nomadic to settled life is passive, with intermediate stages. 
It is with these semi-nomads of the border that the Israelites were 
more familiar, in tradition and in actual intercourse. Ishmael and 

11 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Esau were true Bedawin. But the direct ancestors of the people, 
Abraham and Isaac, were conceived as semi-nomads, dwelling in 
tents, driving their flocks, yet touching points of settled habitation. 
They have not lost their desert character, but they are passing over 
into new ways of life. 

Within the desert itself, human contacts are few. And even then, 
like meets like only to repel it. There are no differences of level, none 
of the resultant impulses when one social order rushes upon another, 
to overwhelm or to be absorbed. Life is in monotone. Development 
must be from within, and is of necessity slow, if it comes at all. Hav- 
ing so few of material goods, the desert dwellers are not forced to ex- 
ercise — save in the limitless domain of imagination — whatever of 
creative or inventive faculty nature may have wrought into their 
fibre. Their sole wealth is in their flocks; and the simple occupation 
of tending them suffices to supply their needs. Israel had no art ex- 
cept the art of poetry and of story-telling; in the lesser crafts, the na- 
tion borrowed of its neighbors. But the very narrowness of range in 
external interests results in the intensification of innate qualities. 
The Arabs are what they are, to the highest degree. 

The life of these shepherds, however, is not a pastoral, such as 
classic poets have celebrated, an idyl of some far-off golden age. 
Mother of multitudes, the desert is a stern nurse. Withholding all 
but a scant allowance of pasturage and water over wide distances, 
she condemns her sons to a life of wandering and war. According to 
the season, they move from oasis to oasis with a kind of cosmic regu- 
larity of ebb and flow; until with the lapse of long periods, the in- 
creasing pressure of tribes from the interior of the desert forces those 
on the edges over into the fertile lands already won for civilization: 
and there follows a great migration such as brought the Hebrews into 
history. Apart from their wealth in flocks, the right to water is the 

12 


BEFORE DAWN 


nomads’ only property, guarded most jealously. Tribes are ever ex- 
posed to the attack of marauding rivals, who sweep suddenly out of 
the horizon to plunder the encampment. Dispute for the possession 
of oases is a frequent occasion of conflict. There was strife between 
the herdsmen of Abraham and of Lot. Again, Abraham reproved 
Abimelech of Gerar because of the well of water which the king’s 
servants had violently taken away; and he prevailed upon Abimelech 
to receive from his hand seven ewe lambs as witness that Abraham 
had dug the well. Woven into the narratives of Israel’s forty years’ 
wanderings in the wilderness as a leading motive is the constant quest 
for water. The vital necessity of it serves to invest all springs and 
wells with a powerful imaginative and religious significance. They are 
the abode of deity, to be approached only with due ceremony. One of 
the oldest bits of Hebrew poetry is the song, in the spirit of magical 
incantation, at once solemn and exulting, which accompanies the la- 
bor of digging a well, and greets the bursting forth of the water from 
its hiding in the sands. 

Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it: 

The well, which the princes digged, 


Which the nobles of the people delved, 
With the sceptre, and with their staves. 


Similar songs are current among Arabs to-day. To wanderers out of 
the parched desert, Canaan seemed indeed “‘a good land, a land of 
brooks of water, of fountains and springs, flowing forth in valleys 
and hills.”” Water is the great fructifying principle in nature; out of 
its rare preciousness and divine beneficence Hebrew literature has 
wrought some of its most beautiful and appealing imagery. 

In this life of physical deprivation there are ameliorations. The 
labor needful for the Arab’s starveling subsistence is not hard; and 
the intervals of tending flocks and of the drift from oasis to oasis, 

13 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


even with its risks of petty war, afford abundant leisure. Around the 
camp-fire in the evening, the men gather to listen to song and recita- 
tion; children squat among their elders; and the women are ranged 
discreetly in the background. All give heed with eager expectancy, 
as one or another recounts in verse or prose the traditions of the clan, 
telling of great deeds of tribal heroes or making mock of enemies. Of 
antique happenings the various clans have different versions, each 
clan ascribing the particular achievements to their own ancestors. 
The scene is enacted every evening. And who knows for how many 
centuries into the unrecorded past ? Here was the cradle of Israel’s 
legends of old time. 

So Israel came naturally by its sovereign art of narrative. Among 
the Arabs are professional reciters, who invest their occupation with 
the dignity of a guild, holding themselves true to its traditions and its 
craft. If the stories in their pack are popular in origin, character, 
and appeal, yet, through repeated manipulation by skilled practi- 
tioners, they take on the form of art. Doubtless also among the no- 
mad Hebrews and the Israelites after their settlement in Canaan ' 
were similar entertainers of the clan. In the Hebrew scriptures, many 
of the stories woven into the continuous narrative of the large Books 
were originally oral legends. Though recorded when the practice of 
writing was new to Israel, they are not the first tentative effort of 
an art in its beginnings; rather they represent the end of a long 
development. In their present setting they have suffered mutilation 
in the process of adaptation by successive editors. Disengaged 
from the confusions of their immediate context and seen thus in 
their pristine completeness, they are of wonderful simplicity and 
clarity. Told and retold through generations by skilled reciters in 
the hearing of expert listeners, they have reached a satisfying finality 


of form. 
14 


BEFORE DAWN 


In the range and romance of the Arabs’ imaginative utterance is 
expressed their intensity of nature. The vast simplicity of the desert 
has moulded the character of the race in sharpest definition; but that 
character is by no means simple. The nomad combines many contra- 
dictory traits. The meagreness of his fare fosters austerity, at the 
same time that he is passionate and sensual. Though he has hardly 
enough for his own needs and nothing to spare, there is a touch of os- 
tentation in his lavish generosity toward the guest whom the chance 
of the desert may have brought to his tent. The material conditions 
of his environment urge him to constant restlessness, but provide him 
no object; and he is forced to a long patience. What he lacks in phys- 
ical strength he supplies by guile — a trait which finds a brilliant 
exemplar in the patriarch Jacob. The Arab’s code of honor is a say- 
age one, knife-edged and pitiless, but he observes it with inflexible 
punctiliousness. Outside the code, against enemies or dealing with 
strangers beyond the clan, he knows no scruple. Of “quick metal,” 
he is swayed by a hot intensity of feeling, which in religion becomes 
fanaticism. The prophets of Israel were true to type. _ 

In his reaction to the world about him, the nomad is concrete and 
immediate; he has little power of abstraction or reflection. His imag- 
ination is stimulated by the great vacancies of earth, and he animates 
the void with multiple and ominous life. Mysterious voices which re- 
sound in solitudes and empty places, though but the rustling of the 
sands or the hiss of winds, betray the movement of supernatural ma- 
levolent beings. Wild creatures of the desert, hostile to men, all creep- 
ing things and hairy monsters and obscene birds, are “jinn” or de- 
mons, to be terribly feared and, if possible, eluded. Everywhere dan- 
ger lurks, vague, unintelligible, ready to strike. There, just beyond, 
terror impends. The immense susceptibility of the primitive Semites 
to dread and awe may be an element in that “sense of sin’”’ which the 

15 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


prophets of Israel evoked and the psalmists voiced supremely, an ap- 
titude which finds its nearest parallel among the kindred Babylo- 
nians in their penitential psalms. The belief in demons persisted ac- 
tively in Babylonia throughout its history and figured powerfully in 
the daily life of the people. In Israel it was conquered, though not 
wholly eradicated, by the religion of Yahweh; and it may be traced 
in the Hebrew writings as the echo of a past that has been outlived. 
Thus, as a single instance, the serpent in Eden was originally a de- 
mon, derived from Babylonia, but transformed by Israel. The lone- 
liness of the desert sharpens the nomad’s perception of the pregnant 
emptiness around him. In his isolation from human contacts, he is 
made aware of the great drama of natural forces which may threaten 
or befriend. Out of such beginnings in the primeval past was sprung 
the imagination which achieved the sublimities of the Book of Job, as 
the flower is akin to the root. 

The fear of hostile mysterious beings is countervailed by the wor- 
ship of the known and kindly powers of nature. For light on his jour- 
neyings, the nomad looks to the stars and the waxing and waning 
moon. The heat of noonday brings the period of rest; and in the 
burning wastes of sand where no green thing is, the sun is not a friend. 
The gods of the night skies, therefore, composed his pantheon. The 
phases of the moon determined the Israelite calendar; and as late as 
the reign of Josiah, the prophets Zephaniah and Jeremiah combatted 
the people’s worship of the “host of heaven,” at that time borrowed 
from Assyria. But gods are upon earth as well. Springs and trees, 
rare in the desert, but so much the more beneficent, and even rocks 
—a shadow in a weary land — are holy because the dwelling-place 
of a god, or perhaps his visible presence. So El roi appeared to Hagar 
at the spring in the wilderness. Yahweh revealed himself to Abra- 
ham in the terebinth of Moreh. Jacob in his flight into the East is 

16 


BEFORE DAWN 


overtaken by the night; he goes to sleep with a stone under his head, 
and dreams marvellously. 


And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely Yahweh 
is in this place; and I knew it not. And he was afraid, and said, How 
dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and 
this is the gate of heaven. And Jacob rose up early in the morning, 
and took the stone that he had put under his head, and set it up for a 
pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it. 


In this ceremony Jacob offers a libation to the deity resident in the 
stone, who had vouchsafed the portentous dream. That these traces 
of early Semitic belief and ritual have been preserved is due to the 
fact that the compilers of the narratives have transformed the orig- 
inal local numen of spring or tree or stone into Yahweh, and they 
impute to the ancestors the orthodox practices of the Mosaic religion. 
But for the appreciation of the genius of Israel in its gradual de- 
velopment, these survivals of old custom take on new meanings 
when seen in their primal significance. 


In the desert Israel’s genius received a temper which later experi- 
ences were to fashion anew, but could not wholly transmute. The 
group of tribes that afterwards constituted the people of Yahweh un- 
derwent external modifications as they moved from one condition 
through many vicissitudes to another land and different way of life. 
Some of the tribes, at least, endured bondage in Egypt; and after 
their deliverance, they wandered again in the wilderness. Prolonged 
uncertain struggles still confronted them, before they won the prom- 
ised land and established their kingdom. But the desert training in 
their racial youth created the stuff with which later conditions were 
to work; influences which awaited them in the secular process of 
their development had always to reckon with this primary material. 

17 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


So the Bedawy character illustrates the qualities of early Israel, for 
good or bad, as they were embodied in its heroes. Tenacity, enthusi- 
asm, craft and savage cruelty, an immense capacity for suffering, a 
patience that would not yield, a vision of blessing only in some 
future, were Israel’s inheritance of the desert. 


- II 
OUT OF THE DESERT 


BETWEEN the emergence of the Hebrew tribes, by whatever devious 
ways, from their native desert, and the settlement of the Israelites in 
Canaan as masters of the country, intervened several centuries. 
Some of the tribes reached the border of Egypt; thence another gen- 
eration returned through the wilderness south of Canaan, and at 
length from the territory east of the Jordan their sons moved to the 
gradual conquest of the promised land. From the sojourn in Egypt, 
backward, a vague span of time recedes into an obscurity but just 
yielding to the deceptive lights of earliest dawn. Of this period, in- 
deed, Israel had traditions, which later writers fashioned into contin- 
uous narratives, relating with great picturesque charm the personal 
adventures and wayfarings of Israel’s immediate ancestors. Risen 
spontaneously within various groups or tribes, and passing orally 
from generation to generation, the legends of the patriarchs, as fixed 
in written form, are the issue of a long and complex process. Though 
accepted as realities in their own living day, they are now but shadows 
in a twilight beyond discerning; and the substance of fact which 
they seem to body forth can only be divined. 

Diverse in origin, woven of strands gathered afar, the narratives 
of Israel’s beginnings lend themselves to different interpretations. 
Some readers of the Book of Genesis see in the legends a faithful por- 
trait of historical characters, and a literal and exact record of events. 
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his twelve sons; Ishmael, Laban, Lot, 
Esau; Sarah, Rebekah, Leah, and Rachel; and all the rest of the en- 
gaging dramatic figures that throng its pages, were real persons. And 

19 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the stories told of them are the account of actual happenings, unerr- 
ingly transmitted through the centuries. Others regard these tradi- 
tional ancestors of the Israelites and their kindred as “eponymous 
heroes”: the individual is the personification and representative of 
races and peoples and tribes and families. The incidents attaching to 
them are the free creation of the legend-making imagination, yet 
with a kernel of historic fact; the fortunes of individuals, therefore, 
may symbolize in a general way large tribal movements and experi- 
ences. Still others go farther back in time and find the origins of Is- 
rael’s progenitors in the personages of antique mythology. Gods of 
greater or lesser rank, touching earth, become local ‘“‘heroes,”’ each 
with his appropriate legend; in turn heroes, brought closer to the peo- 
ple, are transformed into ancestors: until finally the whole sheaf of 
myth and legend, garnered from the entire field of Semitic life, spring- 
ing out of Arabia and extending through Babylonia, Aram, and 
Canaan, inures to the sons of Israel. 

To apprehend Israel’s genius, it is not necessary to decide for one 
of these interpretations as against all others. Probably no one hy- 
pothesis is wholly true; possibly all of them are partly true. Mani- 
festly the figures of Israel’s early narratives to the beginning of 
authentic history are not all on the same plane. Abraham is the 
personal name of an individual; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah are the 
names of tribes. Jacob was undoubtedly a local hero; Israel, with 
whom Jacob was afterward identified, was a construction of the gene- 
alogical system. Noah the husbandman, who discovered the vine and 
fell a victim to his invention, is not the same as the God-fearing 
worthy who by virtue of his piety was instrumental in preserving the 
race of men. Isaac may be wholly legendary; Moses was certainly 
historical. Perhaps the truth lies in the just combination of the right 
elements out of all interpretations — if only it could be attained! 

20 


OUT OF THE DESERT 


According to their own reading of their history, the family of Israel 
were sprung in direct descent from the one ancestor Abraham. The 
groups which later made up the nation constituted a unity from the 
first. Though they were at times divided by the hazards of the con- 
quest of Canaan which followed upon the deliverance from Egypt 
and the forty years’ wandering in the wilderness, yet the bond of 
brotherhood was never utterly loosed, and the tribes were finally re- 
united under the monarchy. Their rise and their present community 
of interest were foreordained. The sons of Israel were Yahweh’s 
peculiar people, chosen and guided to a special destiny. 

The narratives which thus coerce the multiform ancient traditions 
into a seeming unity were composed after the establishment of the 
kingdom. Embodying material long current and beloved among the 
people, yet they were themselves erudite rather than popular. From 
the vantage-point of the monarchy secure in the mastery of Canaan, 
it was possible to survey the development of Israel as an entirety and 
to see in it the working of a single principle. The authors of the older 
narratives, the Judahite and the Ephraimite, were animated compul- 
sively by zeal for Israel’s religion. Their conscious informing pur- 
pose, so different from the upwelling play of men’s imaginings free in 
time and place, was to show forth the regnant loving-kindness of 
Yahweh in the guidance of his people as personified in their tradi- 
tional ancestors. So in the stories of the patriarchal exploits, their 
course is ascribed to the active ever-present intervention of Yahweh. 
At his behest, Abraham left home and kindred to set out for a new 
country; the stages of his journey were signalized by renewed prom- 
ises and blessings; and his principal act at each station of his wander- 
ings was to build an altar to Yahweh and worship there. Jacob’s 
unfailing success was due less to his own consummate craft than to 
Yahweh’s overruling favor. 

21 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


The design of the narrators was carried out with such singleness of 
eye and mind as intentionally to exclude everything that could not be 
brought to bear on their high purpose. Of the great mass of legend 
current throughout the Semitic world were preserved only the stories 
that could be turned to the service of Israelite national history in its 
relation to the national worship. Even.of material distinctively He- 
brew, what is lost probably far exceeded what has survived; for doubt- 
less traditions that were merely popular and incapable of receiving 
religious import were rejected. Yet in fragments genuinely ancient 
the old fibre persisted, the original coloring was not wholly overlaid. 
From faint traces left by the passing of the primal day, unassimilated 
to the main design or not quite transformed in the process of editing, 
it may be possible, with tentative help from Egyptian and Canaanite 
records, to form an approximate though vague conception of events 
which out of certain Hebrew tribes fashioned the people of Israel. 


About the middle of the second millennium before Christ, many 
nomad tribes, separately or in companies, pushed forth from the Ara- 
bian desert in a general migration. In different regions and at differ- 
ent periods, groups of these tribes united to possess a territory and to 
constitute a people. Some moved north and west by way of Aram; 
others came up from the south toward Canaan. Among them all, the 
latest to consolidate were the Israelites. By what accident or design 
just these special few tribes, distinct from the rest, were welded into 
a closer union as the sons of Jacob-Israel is not known. Along their 
borders were other peoples, swept forward in the same great move- 
ment, with whom they recognized a certain original kinship, which 
they represented in their historical narratives in terms of a genealogi- 
cal system. Esau-Edom was the elder brother of Jacob, from whom 
Jacob cunningly won the birthright. Moab and Ammon were sons of 

22 


OUT OF THE DESERT 


Abraham’s nephew Lot. The link extended even into the desert, for 
Ishmael was the son of Abraham by his wife’s handmaid; and other 
desert tribes were sprung from Abraham’s concubine Keturah. Out of 
this larger Hebrew group, the tribes which came together as ‘‘Israel”’ 
had in common the worship of Yahweh. This was the very essence of. 
their union. At what moment in their progress they relinquished 
their desert religion to acknowledge the sovereignty of the God of 
Sinai is uncertain. In the oldest narrative, written in Judah, the pa- 
triarchs are conceived as worshipping Yahweh from the beginning. 
In the narrative composed in the northern kingdom about a century 
later, and also in the Priestly version written after the Exile, the God 
of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, though then unknown by his 
name, was none other than he who revealed himself as Yahweh to 
Moses in the land of Midian, at Mount Horeb or Sinai. The precise 
fact cannot be determined. What other motives or occasions there 
may have been for the amalgamation of the tribes who became the Is- 
raelite nation remain obscure. The process was gradual, and was not 
completed till long after their final settlement in Canaan. 

According to its own traditions, the nation was originally consti- 
tuted of twelve tribes, descended from the twelve sons of Israel. The 
number was the creation of the genealogical scheme. The same sys- 
tem was applied to Ishmael, to Edom, and to other peoples. In prac- 
tice there were twelve tribes in Israel only by an arbitrary reckoning. 
There was not just this number of tribes actually in existence at any 
given moment; and the various nominal enumerations of them by the 
several narrators are not mutually consistent. 

One element in the tribal beginnings of Israel that all the narra- 
tives in common emphasize had a basis in fact. The distinction be- 
tween the northern tribes, which were afterwards known as Israel or 
Ephraim, coming from Aram, and the southern tribes, under the later 

23 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


leadership of Judah, from the wilderness south of Canaan, repre- 
sented a real difference. After the division of the kingdom, which en- 
sued upon the death of Solomon, the two groups were set over 
against each other in rivalry, often in militant hostility, and each 
went its separate way. Israel and Judah were henceforth two na- 
tions, rather than one people; and each followed its own course of 
development to its own end. Throughout their history, the contrast 
between north and south was fundamental, not only in topographi- 
cal environment with its resultant influence upon events, but also in 
temper and culture. Judah, among its hills austere and intense, had 
the longer history; the life of Israel, passionate and luxurious in the 
broad fertile plains about Samaria, was more checkéred and tumultu- 
ous. So, too, at the outset, before their union as the sons of Jacob, 
the two groups had fared along different ways. These differences are 
indicated in the stories of the several ancestors. Abraham is associ- 
ated with the south, with Hebron and Beer-sheba; and he goes down 
into Egypt. In Egypt also Joseph comes to great honor; and thither 
his brothers follow him. But northward runs the adventurous course 
of Jacob. In Beth-el, in Shechem, and in Gilead east of the Jordan, 
divine favor attends the hero and turns the issue to his advantage. 
Seeking his fortune in distant Aram, he prospers famously; there he 
wins his wives and founds a family. The country of the northeast is 
the scene of his characteristic trials and triumphs. Although the an- 
cestors are thus depicted as individuals, doubtless their doings echo 
the remembrance of tribal experience; and the legends reflect a dim 
image of the conditions which confronted the Hebrews as they were 
launched from the desert upon an unfamiliar land. 

The stories of the patriarchs represent the ancestral tribes as al- 
ready in contact with civilization. It is untold years since they 
emerged from the isolation of the desert, for Abraham is at home in 


24 


iy 


OUT OF THE DESERT 


the city of Haran; and as semi-nomads, dwelling in tents and keeping 
flocks, they wander from place to place. Herein the tradition is true in 
spirit to real conditions. But the actual background is suggested, if 
at all, only with extreme vagueness. The attention of the narrators is 
fixed on the principal personages, thrown into such sharp relief that 
they seem to act in vacuo. Canaan, so far as concerns the legends, 
was an empty land. Cities were there, of course, and ancient sites, 
which received a new and special sanctity because Yahweh there re- 
vealed himself to the fathers. But for the most part the patriarchs 
were free to journey at will, unmolested and unafraid. It is only on oc- 
casion that they encounter the native inhabitants. Although Lot be- 
comes a city dweller in Sodom and Isaac tills the soil in Gerar, there 
is no evidence in the narratives of Genesis that the earliest Hebrew 
tribes of whom history can take cognizance were in any wise modified 
by the old and highly developed culture of Canaan. 

As semi-nomads, the newcomers have lost much of their primal 
warlike character. Abraham, a prosperous sheikh, seeks no quarrel 
with the people whose territory he touches in his wanderings; he is 
glad to compose all differences amicably. Reason, blended with just 
the right amount of guile, is better than force. In contrast to the gra- 
cious serenity of the pious Abraham, and probably closer to the fact, 
are violence and rapine enacted by Jacob’s untamed sons. Simeon 
and Levi, treacherously though not without provocation, fall upon 
Shechem and put the inhabitants to the sword. Here two tribes seem 
to have united in a common enterprise; and the fact of their alliance 
was held in proverbial remembrance. 


Simeon and Levi are brethren; 
Weapons of violence are their swords. 
Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; 
And their wrath, for it was cruel. 


25 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Finally their undertaking resulted disastrously. Not only did they 
fail to wrest from the Shechemites territory for themselves in which 
to settle: Simeon was forced back to the borders of the desert; and 
Levi as a tribe — for the identification of the priesthood with Levi 
was the work of a later period — disappeared entirely. They were 
divided in Jacob and scattered in Israel. 

The story of Shechem mirrors other aspects of the Hebrews’ en- 
trance into Canaan. According to the legend, Jacob with his numer- 
ous family is encamped in neighboring territory. Shechem, son of 

Hamor, prince of the land, seeing Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, does 
her wrong. He offers to make reparation by however much dowry 
and gift, for he loves the damsel; and his father proposes that the 
Shechemites and the family of Jacob intermarry. “And ye shall 
dwell with us: and the land shall be before you; dwell and trade ye 
therein, and get you possessions therein.” But the sons of Jacob 
answer them with guile. Then follow the treacherous onslaught of 
Dinah’s brothers Simeon and Levi, and the massacre of the She- 
chemites. 

A possible interpretation of the story suggests what may well have 
been the conditions of the Hebrews’ first contact with the Canaanites. 
Instead of being permitted to move in peace throughout the land, 
as the patriarchal narratives in general imply, the semi-nomadic 
Hebrew tribes from the borders of the desert, singly or in groups, 
either were gradually absorbed by the native population of a district, 
as they settled there to dwell and trade and get possessions, or they 
came into armed conflict with them so that the one or the other were 
virtually destroyed. Thus the tribes who bore the names of the sons 
of Jacob’s concubines and were therefore not of the true strain may 
have arisen out of the fusion of the newcomers with communities of 
settled Canaanites; or other tribes, like Simeon and Levi, failing to 

26 


OUT OF THE DESERT 


conquer were lost to history. Such at least were the circumstances 
of the Israelites’ later entrance and settlement in Canaan, after the 
exodus from Egypt. 

Just here the question obtrudes as to whether there were two inva- 
sions of Canaan, respectively before and after the Egyptian episode, 
or only one. If there were two distinct invasions, and if the sojourn 
in Egypt was the lot of many Hebrew tribes, then the difference be- 
tween their first contact with Canaan as represented in the stories of 
the ancestors and their later and historical conquest would seem to 
be that after the residence in Egypt the Israelite group was made up 
of a larger number of tribes than at first, acting now with a definite 
consciousness of their unity of interest and purpose. It may be, how- 
ever, that the legends but reflect in shadowy symbol the events of the 
historic conquest. The dubious evidence lurking in Israel’s records 
offers these alternatives: either the Hebrews penetrated Canaan be- 
fore the Egyptian sojourn, leaving there in occupation some tribes 
that did not go to Egypt, and the early legends echo a true memory 
of their fortunes; or certain incidents of the actual conquest, which is 
recounted in detail and seeming fidelity in Numbers and Joshua, 
were carried back by the authors of Genesis to apply to the patri- 
archs. The two accounts of the Hebrew invasion then would be par- 
allel and duplicate. A precise conclusion would seem to be impossi- 
ble, were it not for precarious inferences that may be drawn from 
sources in Egypt and Canaan. 


Whatever authentic material the Hebrew narratives supply in illus- 
tration of this earliest period of Israelite history is at the most frag- 
mentary; and the result is chiefly negative. The obscurity is lighted, 
but not cleared, by flashes out of Egyptian and Canaanite records, 
though their import is uncertain. At Tell-el-Amarna in Middle 

27 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL ~ 


Egypt were discovered in 1887-88 a number of letters, written on 
clay tablets in the Babylonian script, and addressed to Amenhotep 
III and Amenhotep IV, kings of Egypt, by the native princes of Ca- 
naan, dating from the fifteenth century before Christ. Among them 
are tablets despatched by Abd-khiba, ruler of Jerusalem, to the Pha- 
raoh. The vassal complains to his Egyptian overlord of the inroads of 
“ Khabiru’’-folk; and he asks the Pharaoh to send troops to his aid, 
that he may defend himself against them. He writes: “The Khabiru 
are plundering all the lands of the King. ... If there are no troops 
here, then the lands of my lord the King will be lost.’’ Again he says 
that Milkilu and the sons of Labaja — evidently his enemies among 
other princes in Canaan — have given the land of the king to the 
Khabiru. The territories of Gazri, Ashkaluna, and Lakis have fur- 
nished them provisions, oil, and all necessaries. “The Khabiru are 
taking the cities of the King.” “Labaja and the land Shakmi [She- 
chem] have given everything to the Khabiru.” “The land of the King 
is fallen away’’ to them. So the enemies of the Pharaoh’s officer in 
Jerusalem have made common cause with the invaders. The extent 
to which the newcomers have penetrated Canaan is indicated in the 
mention of Shechem in the north, Gezer in the centre, and Ashkelon 
and Lachish in the south. The report concerning Shechem is particu- 
larly striking in view of the Israelite story of Simeon and Levi. 

In letters from local rulers farther north is much news regarding 
the movements and exploits of the “Sa-Gaz.”” The enmity of the Sa- 
Gaz warriors against Rib-addi, regent of Gubla, is become mighty. 
He asks the Pharaoh to send him fifty pairs of horses and two hun- 
dred foot-soldiers that he may be able to maintain himself in Shigata 
against Abd-ashirta, the dog! lest his enemy gather together all the 
Sa-Gaz and take the city. He complains further that all the lands will 
ally themselves with the marauders. Zimriddi, prince of Sidon, re- 

28 


OUT OF THE DESERT 


ports that all the cities which the king had given into his hand have 
gone over to the Sa-Gaz. Abimilki of Tyre sends word that the king 
of Khasura has ranged himself with the invaders, and the land of the 
Pharaoh has fallen to them. Milkilu, already mentioned in a letter of 
Abd-khiba, writes: “May the King my lord save his land out of the 
hand of the Sa-gaz!’’ Another reports that thirteen Egyptians were 
wounded in a raid of the plunderers. And so the story runs through a 
numerous array of letters from the whole length of the Coastland. 
The word SA-GAZ, written as an ideogram, has the meaning rob- 
ber, free-booter. In the Amarna tablets generally, the Sa-Gaz play 
the same role as the Khabiru in Abd-khiba’s letters from Jerusalem. 
The Khibiru, a people, therefore, were Sa-Gaz, a horde of plun- 
derers. The word Khabiru is regarded as the cuneiform equivalent 
of the Hebrew word ‘ibrim, meaning Hebrews. If the two words 
are not equivalent phonetically, at least there seems to be no doubt 
that what was true historically of the Khabiru was equally true of 
the Hebrews —the large group of tribes, from a certain few of 
whom were descended the Israelites. Bands of invaders from the 
edges of the desert flowed in upon the cultivated land, troubling 
further the insecurity of cities and petty principalities menaced 
already to the point of extreme turmoil by rivalries and feuds 
among themselves. Warlike, and plundering as they went, they 
withdrew their attack when satisfied with booty; or perhaps, as 
the price of peace, they extorted from the possessors of the land a 
strip of territory on which to establish themselves and in time to 
merge with the settled population. Among these marauders, the 
high-souled Abraham, the gentle Isaac, and crafty Jacob are far 
to seek. But it is not too wild a fancy to descry in them the forerun- 
ners, if not the ancestors, of the militant tribes who in the hardihood 
of their youth overbore the resistance of an older culture and set their 
29 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


own distinctive mark upon the land. The glimpses which the ar- 
chives of Amarna thus disclose are fugitive and brief; in a swift mo- 
ment of illumination they reveal the Hebrews on their way. rs 

The memory of Israel’s beginnings survived among the people in 
legend and romantic story. Authentic traces, however, of Israel’s 
first contact with Canaan have been found in Egypt, though they are 
of the slightest, and the interpretation is doubtful. On the great tem- 
ple at Karnak is inscribed a list of more than a hundred names of 
territories conquered by Thutmose III in his campaign against 
Syria about 1470 B.c. Among them occur the names, j-’-q-b-’-r and 
j-s-p-‘-r. These are held to be the Egyptian equivalent of the Hebrew 
Jacob-el and Joseph-el. What this scanty evidence establishes is the 
fact that about the time of the Hebrews’ invasion of Canaan, the 
names Jacob and Joseph were known in that country as applying to 
districts, or to groups identified with them. Similarly, in lists of the 
time of Seti I and of Ramses II, the “ Pharaoh of the oppression,”’ is 
mentioned a hill Aser, apparently in the territory afterward occupied 
by the tribe Asher. Finally, in a hymn of victory, celebrating the 
triumphs of King Merneptah (1225-1215 B.c.), the “Pharaoh of the 
Exodus,” occur the lines: 


Canaan is seized with every evil; 
Ashkelon is carried away; Gezer is taken; Yenoam is annihilated; 
Ysiraal is desolated, its seed is not. 


As Merneptah’s expedition led through the territory in which the 
Israelites were settled after the conquest, the reference would seem to 
be unmistakable. Whether Israel was already in actual possession of 
the land in the time of Merneptah, as the allusion to its “seed’’ would 
indicate, is not certain. 

It may not be too much to infer that the Hebrew tribes who were 
the ancestors of historic Israel penetrated Canaan before the defini- 

30 


OUT OF THE DESERT 


tive conquest. Such of them as kept the integrity of their desert or- 
ganization and their primal desert character came as enemies and 
maintained themselves by force. Other tribes, less strong in numbers, 
less warlike of spirit or more adaptable, merged with the native pop- 
ulation and lost their identity. The tribes which famine urged on 
toward the fertile delta of the Nile were still shepherds and wander- 
ers. They had in common their desert origin and a similarity of con- 
dition and experience. What other outward circumstances or what 
inner compulsions served to unite them before Moses performed his 
great work for Israel, history has not revealed. 


Hil 
SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


A WANDERING Aramean was my father, and he went down into 
Egypt, and sojourned there, few in number; and he became there a 
nation, great, mighty, and populous: and the Egyptians evil en- 
treated us, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage: and we 
cried unto Yahweh, the God of our fathers, and Yahweh heard our 
voice, and saw our affliction, and our toil, and our oppression: and 
Yahweh brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand, and with 
an outstretched arm, and with great terribleness, and with signs, and 
with wonders: and he hath brought us into this place, and hath given 
us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey. 


No event of their early history was so profoundly impressed upon 
the memory of the Israelites as the sojourn in Egypt and the exodus. 
Throughout their scriptures are frequent and impassioned references 
to this great initial crisis of their experience. It was in Egypt, they 
told themselves, that the family of Jacob became a people, expanding 
in numbers and at length powerful enough to escape from bondage. 
Here they were granted a leader whom Yahweh raised up to be their 
deliverer and guide, their lawgiver, and the founder of their religion. 
Though the several traditions vary in the details composing the inci- 
dents of the Egyptian sojourn, beginning with Abraham, resumed 
with Joseph and his brethren, and culminating in the liberation of 
the people under Moses, yet all agree as to the central fact. Israel 
dwelt in Egypt. And Yahweh rescued his people out of the hand of 
the oppressor, led them on their long wanderings in the wilderness, 
and brought them gloriously into the promised land. 

A tradition so ardently cherished and transmitted with such piety 

32 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT | 


would seem to have some basis in fact. Few episodes in Israel’s for- 
tunes have been elaborated with equal wealth of circumstance. 
Among all the patriarchal narratives the story of Joseph is wrought 
with the greatest intricacy of plot, the subtlest character analysis, 
and the richest embellishment of accessories. The figure of Moses, 
magnified in retrospect through the mists of breaking day, is realized 
with a vivid completeness matched only by the consummate portrait 
of David, drawn from life. Though the event issued happily, vindi- 
cating the might of Yahweh and securing Israel’s title among the na- 
tions, yet the memory of its humiliation is not lost or obscured. No 
people in its traditions invents of itself an ignominy which it has not 
actually suffered. That Israel remembered gladly the bondage in 
Egypt and exulted in it, attests a core of fact, round which imagina- 
tion spun an iridescent tissue of romance. 


Incursions of nomad tribes across the borders of Egypt such as the 
Hebrew traditions symbolize were not impossible or unknown. Per- 
haps the great migration out of the desert in the fourth millennium 
carried some of the wanderers to the valley of the Nile, for the Egyp- 
tian language in its oldest form bears traces of Semitic influence. A 
story of the Middle Kingdom, about 2000 B.c., tells how Sinuhe, a no- 
ble at the court of the Pharaoh, fleeing from Egypt meets at the bor- 
der some Bedawy tribes; finding asylum with them, he is recognized 
by a sheikh among them “who had been in Egypt.” Depicted on a 
tomb of a century later is a group of Semitic tribesmen, accompanied 
by women and children and asses and goats, and laden with articles 
of trade. The roads had long been open to diplomacy and commerce 
between Egypt and Canaan. But the Empire was exposed likewise to 
attack. After the Middle Kingdom had come to an end with the fall of 
the Twelfth Dynasty, about 1800, a strange people, many and pow- 

33 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


erful, out of the east and north, poured in upon the Delta. There 
they established a sovereignty that laid all Egypt under subjection. 
For a century and more the invaders maintained themselves as mas- 
ters of the country. With the rise to power of a new native dynasty, 
the Eighteenth, roundly 1600, these Hyksos or “shepherd Kings,” 
after a struggle lasting nearly fifty years, were driven forth; and they 
disappeared from history as strangely as they had come. Were they 
Bedawin from the desert, as they were described by the Egyptians? 
Were they Canaanites from the strong cities of the coastland? Or 
were they of the mysterious race of the Hittites out of the distant 
north? Whoever they may have been, their victorious influx reveals 
the perennial liability of Egypt to invasion along her northeastern 
frontier. 

A closer parallel to the Hebrews’ entry into Egypt is found in a 
papyrus of the time of Amenhotep IV, the Pharaoh to whom were ad- 
dressed many of the Amarna letters. From the turmoil of Canaan, 
suffering under the inroads of the Khabiru and devastation by the 
Sa-Gaz, some of the inhabitants sought refuge in Egypt. An officer of 
the Pharaoh writes concerning them: “Their countries are starving, 
they live like goats of the mountain. ...A few of the Asiatics, who 
know not how they should live, have come [begging a home in the do- 
main?] of Pharaoh, after the manner of your father’s fathers since the 
beginning.’’ So Abraham, in the Israelite tradition, went down into 
Egypt because of a grievous famine in Canaan. So too, Jacob, ina 
time of dearth, hearing there was corn in Egypt, sent his sons thither 
to buy food. Such missions from less favored countries were appar- 
ently not unusual, for the Pharaoh’s officer cites immemorial custom 
as the justification of his act in admitting strangers into the privileged 
domain of Egypt. A document of the reign of Merneptah, the same 
who recorded his triumph over “‘ Ysiraal,” contains the report that a 

34 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


“tribe of Bedawin from the land of Edom have been allowed to pass 
the fortifications of Thuku [Sukkoth?] to the pools of Pithom in the 
land of Thuku, to find sustenance for themselves and their flocks in 
the territory of the Pharaoh.” In the secular flow and ebb over the 
borders, of which the Egyptian records have preserved these few no- 
tices, the sons of Jacob, with the sufferance of the imperial officers at 
the frontier, may have found entry into Goshen, on the eastern edge 
of the Delta, as one group among many, and, like other peaceably in- 
tentioned wanderers, were allowed a restricted range of territory in 
which to settle with their flocks. 


With inborn pride of race, with David’s glories and the splendors 
of Solomon still bright in memory, the early historians of Israel pic- 
tured their ancestors as a valiant people, able to confront the Egyp- 
tians on equal terms and worthy to stand in the august presence of 
the Pharaoh himself. Of the stupendous scope of Egyptian dominion 
they realized only so much as immediately concerned the personal 
fortunes of their heroes. Israel, drawn in magnified scale, fills the 
foreground; the might and majesty of Egypt serve but to enhance 
the eminence of Israel. Without undue emphasis, as though it were a 
matter of course, the Hebrew narrator tells how the beauty of Sarah 
excites the special remark of the Egyptians. The princes of Pharaoh, 
seeing her, praise her to the king, and she is brought into the royal 
house. For her sake, Abraham is enriched with lavish gifts at Pha- 
raoh’s own hands. When the incident results unhappily for the sov- 
ereign, Abraham is summoned into the supreme presence. The diffi- 
culty is explained away; and the Hebrew sheikh is graciously permit- 
ted to resume his journey under escort of the royal officers. Joseph, 
betrayed and sold into slavery, rises to a post of highest honor in the 
kingdom; only in respect of the throne is Pharaoh greater than he. 

35 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


** And Pharaoh took off his signet ring from his hand, and put it upon 
Joseph’s hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put 
a gold chain about his neck; and he made him to ride in the second 
chariot which he had; and they cried before him, Bow the knee: and 
he set him over all the land of Egypt.’’ And Moses also, spokesman 
of his people, had immediate access to Pharaoh’s presence — a figure 
to threaten and command. 

These traits, elaborated with such evident delight, are the very 
trappings of romance. Yet in principle a career like Joseph’s is not 
improbable, for it is known that foreigners, among them slaves from 
Syria, rose to positions of influence in Egypt. Moreover, many of the 
details of the Joseph stories, whether adapted from old Egyptian 
tales or reflecting a knowledge of Egypt current in Israel in the time 
of the narrators, are faithful transcripts of Egyptian customs. But 
the relation of the Hebrew tribes resident in a little corner of the 
Delta to the vast Empire of the Nile is seen through the distorting 
medium of national pride and zeal for the religion of Yahweh. The 
conditions of the Israelites’ sojourn in Egypt were probably quite 
otherwise than as the narratives represent them, for the differences 
between the nomad Hebrews and the incredibly ancient civilization 
which they touched, but did not penetrate, were extreme. 


Egypt was so old that it seemed never to have been young. The 
span of Israel was but a day. Most ancient of peoples of whom there 
is memory, the Egyptians were descended from a race whose origins 
are unknown. When history lifts the veil a little in the sixth millen- 
nium before Christ, the long slender valley of the Nile is revealed 
sown with villages grouped into small independent districts. Already 
the people were advanced on the way to civilization. They built 
houses of sun-dried brick, they moulded clay into varied and pleasing 

36 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


forms, and with tools of bronze they carved ivory and stone. In boats 
with oars or sails they trafficked on the river with distant villages. 
As early as the forty-third century, they marked the returning sea- | 
sons by a calendar year of three hundred sixty-five days. And they 
had invented writing. 

The course of recorded Egyptian history is traced in terms of dy- 
nasties. The founder of the First Dynasty was Menes, about 3400. In 
the centuries preceding, the petty states had consolidated as the two 
kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt. These domains Menes 
brought together into a single nation, and he thus made himself sole 
ruler of united Egypt, the first of the Pharaohs. In the reigns of the 
first two Dynasties were laid the foundations of the nation’s material 
greatness. The next four Dynasties, ruling at Memphis, at the apex 
of the Delta, from about 2900 to 2400, witnessed an amazing develop- 
ment in art and architecture as well as the extension of Egyptian in- 
fluence abroad. The great pyramids at Gizeh are the work of Pha- 
raohs of the Fourth Dynasty. Trade was borne northward to the 
Phcoenician coast and the islands of the AXgean, and southward to the 
farthest shores of the Red Sea. Upon the lapse of the Sixth Dynasty 
there follows a vaguely determined period of some three hundred 
years. 

With the rise of the Eleventh Dynasty, the central authority has 
shifted from Memphis to Thebes, which henceforth for nearly a mil- 
lennium remains the capital of the Empire. The sway of the Twelfth 
Dynasty, during more than two centuries beginning about 2000, em- 
braces the classic period of Egyptian culture. A century after the fall 
of this magnificent Dynasty, Egypt was subjected to the domination 
of the Hyksos. With their expulsion, the native princes of Thebes 
regained the sovereignty as the Eighteenth Dynasty, about 1580. 
The nation, formerly home-keeping and peace-loving, embarked 

37 


_ THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


upon an immense enterprise of foreign conquest. The Pharaohs of 
this Dynasty, furnished with the horse, which the Hyksos had 
brought to them, carried Egyptian arms to the banks of the upper 
Euphrates. They compelled the submission of the Aramean peoples 
and of the petty kings in Canaan. Asserting its suzerainty from Mes- 
opotamia in the northeast to Nubia in the deep south, Egypt, vast and 
powerful beyond all other lands and nations, stands forth under the 
Eighteenth Dynasty as the first world-empire in history. At just 
this epoch the Hebrews were emerging from the desert in their errant 
progress toward civilization. 

The Israelites have expressed themselves to later ages only in their 
scriptures. Of the Egyptians, every detail of life is iluminated by an 
extraordinarily abundant wealth of material remains. Their buildings 
and statues testify to their engineering skill, their mastery of techni- 
cal processes, and their artistic genius. Reliefs and paintings on the 
walls of temples and tombs picture their manifold interests and occu- 
pations. Articles of use and adornment, the work of craftsman and 
jeweller, show their love of refined luxury. Their literature, in addi- 
tion to numberless ritual texts, reveals their taste for poetry and ro- 
mance. Despite their excessive concern with the life after death, 
their daily ways in every least manifestation disclose a highly colored 
and quite worldly existence. The lowest classes excepted, whose lot 
was a bitter one, the Egyptians cultivated assiduously pleasure and 
elegance. 

In affairs, the Egyptians possessed superlative talent for organiza- 
tion. Conquerors abroad by disciplined armies, the Pharaohs were 
equally skilled in statecraft within the realm; offices were adminis- 
tered under a system of extended ramifications which finally by the 
nicest adjustments reverted to the central authority. Egyptian com- 
merce was carried to the ends of the known world. In the sciences 

38 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


and the liberal arts the people of the Nile were deeply expert; versed 
of course in all cunning magic, they also practised medicine with 
sound understanding; and there were wise men and philosophers out- 
side the priesthood. Of those not of noble birth, the architect and the 
scribe were held in the greatest honor. Superb in art, mistress of all 
learning, Egypt at three transcendent epochs was surpassingly great 
among the nations. 


The splendid Eighteenth Dynasty came practically to an end with 
the “heretic King’’ Amenhotep IV. In his zeal to establish a new re- 
ligion, the worship of one god in place of the many of old Egypt, he 
turned from the career of conquest that had engaged his ambitious 
militant predecessors. Removing the government from Thebes, he 
founded in honor of his god the city of Akhetaton, and there he set 
up his capital; henceforth he devoted his energies to the propagation 
of the new faith, at the cost of Egyptian influence abroad. With good 
reason the princes of Canaan addressed to the devotionally musing 
royal idealist the letters discovered in the ruins of his ephemeral city, 
begging Egyptian support against the devastating raids of the Kha- 
biru and the Sa-Gaz. For the withdrawal of Amenhotep from military 
enterprise had weakened the imperial control of Canaan, which the 
conquering Pharaohs of his Dynasty had compelled to acknowledge 
the overlordship of Egypt; and in the confusion that followed the 
change of policy, the coastland far distant from dreaming Akhetaton 
was uncovered to the invasions of marauding tribes out of the east. 

So when the Hebrews pressed forth from the desert and moved 
against the strongholds of Canaan, the Empire was beginning to re- 
lax its grasp upon the vassal cities of its province. But the warlike 
tribes who sought a footing there yet felt the length and power of the 
Egyptian arm. Some of the newcomers, unable to establish them- 

39 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL ¢ . 


selves in the crowded territory of Canaan or urged by hunger, 
pushed on into the fertile lands of the Delta. There, few in numbers 
and unremarked by the teeming population of the Empire beyond 
them, were they allowed to pitch their black tents and graze their 
flocks in peace. 

The land of Goshen, where the Hebrews were granted freedom to 
range, was a small strip of territory along the northeastern frontier of 
Egypt. Bounded on the north and south by deserts too high to be 
cultivated, it dwindled to a mere channel on the east. “A triangle of 
about ten miles in the side, with perhaps some minor extensions, is all 
that can have been comprised in Goshen.” ! And they were an insig- 
nificant people, one may fancy, these tent-dwellers, tending their 
flocks on the fringe of the great agricultural, trading and military 
Empire that stretched inconceivably into the south. But their earli- 
est historian figured them otherwise, for he affirms proudly, “The 
children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multi- 
plied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with 
them.” With the same fervor of imagination, he records that they 
went out of Egypt ‘“‘six hundred thousand on foot, that were men, 
beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and 
flocks and herds, even very much cattle.” A telling comment on this 
estimate is supplied by a traveller who has penetrated deep into the 
land and the spirit of the desert. “Taking into account the Semitic 
vulgar wise in narration to multiply a true number by tens, the ‘600,- 
000 men’ of Israel that ascended from Egypt might signify 60,000 or 
probably 6000 men; which were nearly the strength of all the tribes 
together of Annezy, that is now the greatest nomad people of Arabia 
and Syria.” 2 


1W. M. Flinders Petrie: Egypt and Israel, p. 29. 
2C. M. Doughty: Travels in Arabia Deserta, 11, p. 605. 


40 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


In the multitudinous life of Egypt this little group of rude shep- 
herds was but the foam of a wave breaking on a farther shore. They 
felt, perhaps, the momentum of the sea of empire that surged by 
them, as they lingered and drifted on its edge. Surrounded by garri- 
sons along this frontier which guarded the roads to Asia, they had 
evidence of the military prowess of the nation of which chance had 
made them an unregarded part; they may have witnessed, too, the 
march of armies setting out for conquest or returning laden with 
spoils. If they still kept the tribal independence of the desert in their 
little enclave, they were yet subject to the authority of the Pharaoh’s 
officers. Therefore they remembered in after ages the armed might of 
Egypt, and they gloried the more in their deliverance. But of direct 
intercourse with the native people there was probably nothing; for 
every shepherd was an abomination to the Egyptians, and the Egyp- 
tians might not eat bread with the Hebrews. Doubtless the Hebrews, 
on their side, were content to live their own life, apart and unmo- 
lested. Though Joseph took an Egyptian to wife, the daughter of the 
priest of On, and Moses was nurtured at the court of the Pharaoh, 
there are few hints in their traditions that the Hebrew sojourners lost 
their sense of racial separateness or were seduced to the worship of 
the native gods. In these circumstances it may be questioned if influ- 
ences from the great centres of Egyptian culture reached the tent- 
dwellers in Goshen. They had no sight of the pyramids and storied 
monuments of old Memphis or the stupendous temples and colossal 
statues of Thebes; perhaps no rumor of these unimaginable splendors 
came to their far outlying corner of the land. The achievements of 
_ literature and gains of science, won by Egypt through ages of favored 
_ effort, passed their simple comprehension. In Goshen, so one may 
conjecture, the Hebrews remained what they had always been — 
keepers of flocks. 

Al 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


The control of Canaan, lost by Amenhotep IV and his immediate 
successors, was retrieved after fifty years by Seti I, second Pharaoh 
of the Nineteenth Dynasty. He was followed on the throne by his 
son Ramses II, called the Great, whose reign of sixty-seven years was 
distinguished less for military triumphs than for its magnificence. In 
a royal line of builders, whose like the world has not seen and whose 
activities embraced millennia, Ramses was preéminent. By his pro- 
digious unremitted efforts, Thebes and the whole valley of the Nile 
were further enriched by grandiose monuments. But the seat of goy- 
ernment had now shifted again to the north; and in the Delta Ramses 
carried out enormous building enterprises. He restored Tanis, which 
was intended to rival Memphis and Thebes. Near the frontier which 
looked toward Asia he built the “store-city”’ of Pithom; and in the 
eastern Delta he founded the residence city, Per Ramses. 


Now there arose a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. 
And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Is- 
rael are too many and too mighty for us: come, let us deal wisely (sub- 
tilely) with them, lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when 
there falleth out any war, they also join themselves unto our enemies, 
and fight against us [as doubtless happened in fact with foreign groups 
resident near the Egyptian frontier], and get them up out of the land. 
Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with 
their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and 
Raamses. ... And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve 
with rigor: and they made their lives bitter with hard service, in mor- 
tar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field. 


The cost in human labor of the Pharaoh’s colossal undertakings 
was beyond reckoning. Peasants, slaves, and the captives of foreign 
wars were ruthlessly impressed into the work. It is not surprising 
that shepherd tribes who had been permitted to range in the Delta 
were likewise compelled to serve. In a document of the reign of Ram- 

42 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


ses IT the writer reports: “I have obeyed the command which my lord 
gave me, saying, Give provision to the soldiers and to the ‘Apriu-folk 
who drag stones for the great fortification of the temple, Ramses- 


9 


meri-Amon.” Further mention of the “‘Apriu” in other contexts 
suggests the possibility of their equivalence with the Hebrews. In 
any case the Hebrew dwellers in Goshen may, as their traditions rep- 
resent, have been forced to task work for the glory of the Pharaoh. 
Moreover, the fear that resident foreigners might combine with 
enemies of Egypt was grounded in experience. Some of the vassal 
princes of Canaan, as soon as the imperial authority was relaxed, 
united with the invading Khabiru to assert their independence of the 
Pharaoh. The eastern frontier of the Delta was ever exposed to as- 
sault by Bedawin out of the desert and by troublous restive bands 
from Canaan or the farther north. There was real danger that the 
nomads who had been granted access to Egypt might make common 
cause with their kinsmen from across the border to menace the un- 
stable peace of the Empire. The facts of Egyptian history supply oc- 
casion and motive for Ramses’ oppression of the Hebrews. 


From the epoch of the incursions of the Khabiru into Canaan to the 
reign of Ramses II was a period of about two hundred years. How 
long the Hebrews had been in Egypt when a new king arose to set at 
forced labor the stranger people within his borders can only be sur- 
mised. It has happened always that when nomads, penetrating a re- 
gion of settled agricultural life, finally obtain a footing there, they are 
gradually transformed to the new conditions, and the free wanderers 
of the desert become peasants attached to the land. Thus the Israel- 
ites, after their conquest of Canaan, fused with the native popula- 
tion, marrying with them, and accepting their customs and ritual 
practices; only by the stern admonitions of its prophets was Israel in 

43 | 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


part restrained from forsaking Yahweh, God of Sinai and the wilder- 
ness, to worship the baals of Canaan. In Egypt, perhaps the tribes 
were at the point of transition: the Pharaoh made their lives bitter 
with all manner of service “in the field.”’ On their wanderings in the 
wilderness after their deliverance, when they had reverted to their 
nomad ways, the people murmured out of the urgency of their dep- 
rivations: ‘‘We remember the fish which we did eat in Egypt for 
nought; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the on- 
ions, and the garlic.”” And centuries later Moses is made to say: “The 
land, whither thou goest in to possess it, is not as the land of Egypt, 
from whence ye came out, where thou sowedst thy seed, and water- 
edst it with thy foot, as a garden of herbs.”’ (Deut. 1110.) Apart 
from these reminiscences, however, if they are true ones, there is no 
indication in the Hebrew records that the ancestors of Israel tilled the 
soil of Egypt; it is everywhere assumed that they were semi-nomads. 
If they remained shepherds, as they had come, it may be inferred 
that the Hebrews’ sojourn in Goshen was relatively brief, extending 
through hardly more than two or three generations. 

Of the tribes, traditionally twelve in number, which later consti- 
tuted the Israelite nation, probably not all went down into Egypt. It 
may be that at the time of their first entrance into Canaan, as part of 
the great migration of the fifteenth century, there were two general 
groups, typified as the Leah tribes, who came from the northeast 
through the land of Aram, and the Rachel tribes, who entered Canaan 
from the south. It was the Rachel tribes, then, which wandered into 
Egypt under the leadership of Joseph. After the exodus, they united 
with kindred tribes still on the borders of Canaan, and together they 
- moved from east of the Jordan to the conquest of the promised land. 
Among the latest to join them, in Canaan, coming up from the south 
was the powerful tribe of Judah. Another symbol for approximately 

44 


SHEPHERDS IN EGYPT 


the same division of the groups was the concept of the Jacob tribes, 
who went down into Egypt, and the Israel tribes, who remained in 
Canaan. If this was their course, the reference to Israel in Mernep- 
tah’s hymn of victory finds an interpretation. The subsequent union 
of these two groups is signified in the identification of Jacob with Is- 
rael. When the separate tribes came together as a nation under the 
monarchy, the great events in the history of individual tribes or 
groups were attributed to the “children of Israel” as a whole; for the 
Israelite narrators, looking back through the obscurity of crowded 
stirring centuries, assumed that the twelve tribes were sprung di- 
rectly from the one ancestor, Jacob-Israel, and constituted a unity 
in the beginning. 

It may be imagined that the Hebrews entered Egypt as a loose and 
accidental array of wandering tribes whom hunger had driven from 
the desert into a more generous land. Unable to gain a footing in tur- 
bulent Canaan, they pushed on toward the valley of the Nile and 
found pasturage in the fertile ranges of the Delta. There they grazed 
their flocks, as they had of old time in the oases of the desert, but now 
with a new sense of unusual good fortune. Though not forever. Bond- 
age was laid upon them, and their lives were made bitter with hard 
service, to which the proud, free nomads were not wonted. The op- 
pression which they suffered thus together welded them perhaps into 
a closer union, in the consciousness of a common fate. Then a leader 
arose among them who revealed to them the possibility also of a 
common future. Rescuing them out of their servitude, he brought 
them through desert regions to the borders of Canaan. These tribes 
were the vital creative nucleus which gathered to itself varied ele- 
ments of kindred strain, but of different experience, to form the na- 
tion of a later age. In the travail of the Egyptian bondage, Israel was 
born. And the momentous events of the sojourn in the wilderness, 

4S 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


working with a temper and material which millennia in the desert 
had been slow to fashion, impressed swiftly upon this people, in 
youth new-given, the stamp of its unique character, holding promise 
of peculiar destiny. 


IV 
WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


Tue historians of Israel, blending ancient traditions, popular legends, 
and echoes of memory into sustained narratives, set forth what they 
conceived to be the nation’s divinely ordered past. Securely estab- 
lished in Canaan, the people had proved unfaithful to the God of the 
fathers. To win them back to their allegiance, the authors of the his- 
tory hoped to inspire the nation with renewed devotion and enthu- 
siasm by recounting in ideal forms the patient loving-kindness of 
Yahweh and the wonders of his mighty hand. 

It was centuries since the deliverance from Egypt. The great 
events of this initial crisis, transfigured in retrospect, were invested 
with all the lustre and dread import that imagination could devise. 
Every stage of Israel’s progress out of slavery to the conquest of 
Canaan was attended by signs and marvels. At the moment of their 
deepest humiliation, Yahweh intervened miraculously to rescue his 
people from the house of bondage, visiting the oppressors with griev- 
ous plagues and overwhelming the hosts of Pharaoh in the sea. In 
the hours of distress on desert marches, he gave the wanderers suste- 
nance. He raised up Moses to be the deliverer of Israel, endowing 
him with wonder-working powers which vanquished all adversities. 
By the mouth of his prophet, Yahweh made known his will. Guided 
from on high, Moses organized the tribes into a people, conscious of a 
common purpose; and by the might of Yahweh’s outstretched arm, 
their leader brought them prosperously through the dangers and 
deprivations of the wilderness to the borders of the promised land. 

The narratives embodying these traditions are so interwoven and 

AT 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


involved that it is impossible to trace the course of events in their 
probable sequence. But tissue of fable as they are, a thread of his- 
toric fact seems to run through the intricate fabric of legend, with its 
imaginative vesture of persons and incidents. Moreover, the tradi- 
tions, even as transformed to the special religious purposes of the nar- 
rators, have preserved many reminiscences of Israel’s way of life in 
the desert steppes before the people entered Canaan to possess it for 
their own. 


A change of king on the throne of Egypt brought a change of for- 
tune to the Hebrew tribes in Goshen; and the free nomads were 
forced to task work to minister to the insatiate pride of the Pharaoh. 
Already they had labored in the building of two cities, when a com- 
manding figure rose among them to rally them to a fateful enterprise. 
Born of Hebrew parents, he had been reared among the Egyptians, 
and received an Egyptian name.! When he was grown up, he re- 
joined his people serving at their tasks in Goshen. Seeing an Egyp- 
tian smiting a Hebrew, he struck down the oppressor, and hid his 
body in the sand. When his act became known, Moses fled to the 
desert land of Midian. There he allied himself with the tribe of the 
Midianites or the Midianite clan of Kenites, marrying the daughter 
of the priest. While he was keeping the flocks of his father-in-law 
in the steppes, he received a revelation of the mountain-god of Sinai, 
in a flame of fire; and a voice charged him to return to Egypt, for 
the king who sought his life was dead, and to deliver his people 
out of the hand of the Egyptians. 

Moses did as Yahweh required. He communicated the revelation 


1 The name Mes, Mesu, is Egyptian, meaning ‘‘son of” — some god. It occurs 
in Thutmose, Rameses. The Hebrew word Mosheh means not “drawn out,” as 
suggested in the narrative, Ex. 210, but ‘‘drawing out.” 


48 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


to his kinsmen in Egypt; and with the promise of divine support and 
guidance, he roused them to their great undertaking. The moment 
was favorable. Taking advantage of a time of plague, to which the 
Nile valley was ever exposed, the Hebrews made their escape. The 
Egyptian troops who pursued them met disaster in the sea on the 
frontier. Reaching the wilderness between Egypt and Canaan, the 
Hebrews wandered there for a generation; and there Moses accom- 
plished his work for Israel. 

The race of which the Hebrews were sprung has produced many 
illumined men of God. From Moses to Mohammed, a long line of 
prophets have been granted access to the divine presence. Im- 
pelled by the fervor of immediate communion with God, they have 
launched themselves upon their world to found a new religion or to 
purify and transform the old. Some, like Amos, Zephaniah, and 
John the Baptist, have been as a voice crying in the wilderness, 
preaching repentance and proclaiming the imminent day of the 
Lord. Others, like Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Mohammed, have been 
men of affairs, gifted with political competence and rare powers of 
initiative and organization. First among them in point of time, if 
not also by virtue of his achievement, was the prophet leader who 
in the name of his God summoned his enslaved kinsmen to rise 
against their taskmasters, inspired them with his enthusiasm to a 
new direction of effort, and created the people of Israel. 

In respect of the manner of his revelation, Moses was true to type. 
Solitude in the desert was a period of preparation. There God ap- 
peared to him in fire, and held converse with him. The legend is eas- 
ily credible, for the theophany to Moses, the flame of light and the 
voice out of the fire, is characteristic of the mystical experience. 
More than this, the figure of Moses, taking shape by gradual accre- 
tion through centuries of tradition, was a composite, uniting in itself 

49 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


many diverse elements. Thus the legend of his preservation as an in- 
fant was told in similar terms of Sargon I of Akkad, in far Babylonia. 
The circumstances of his early years as a “son’”’ to the Pharach’s 
daughter, his magical powers, surpassing the famed magic of Egypt, 
his wonder-working staff, are the creation of the legend-making im- 
agination which is universal. But these garnishments of romance 
do not disguise the essential personality of Moses as a man of signal 
capacity for leadership, of exceptional skill in administration, and 
an authentic religious genius. The reality of Moses has overcome 
tradition. 

It was natural that the fleeing tribes who had escaped from Egypt, 
as it seemed miraculously, should ascribe their deliverance to the 
mighty intervention of their God. 

Sing ye to Yahweh, for he hath triumphed gloriously, 

The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 
The burden and the antiquity of the song which thus celebrates the 
event bear witness to the fact of disaster to Israel’s enemies; and the 
occasion may well have been the flight of the Hebrews from Goshen. 
But the rising of the enslaved tribes and their subsequent doings in 
the wilderness presuppose the initiative and the continued leadership 
of a dominant personality. A man of transcendent religious ardor, a 
prophet directly accredited of God, was needed to quicken the heav- 
ily afflicted, broken-spirited shepherds to the necessary resolution. In 
the long years of enforced labor in mortar and brick and all manner 
of service in the field, the children of former nomads had lost their des- 
ert craft and were likely to perish in the unfamiliar, fearsome wilder- 
ness, if no masterful leader were at hand to bring them securely 
through the perils and hunger and thirst of hostile wastes. The need 
of a guide across the desert was recognized in the traditions: for Yah- 
weh was marvellously present in the pillar of cloud by day and the 

50 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


pillar of fire by night, to show them the way; and afterwards Moses 
asked of his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, that he should be to 
them as eyes, to spy out a path over the trackless sands. But still an- 
other task awaited the fugitives. The vagrant tribes and the mixed 
multitude accompanying them must be welded into a people with a 
common interest and purpose before they could hope to wrest from 
its ancient, strongly established possessors a bountiful territory 
which they could make their home. If there were no record of Moses, 
a figure like Moses would have to be invented. 


Yet the tribes who fled into the wilderness, crushed though they 
may have been by years of servile labor, had not lost all stamp and 
memory of their origin. For their traditions kept alive for centuries 
afterwards the imaginings of a people whose native land was the des- 
ert. Thus the narrative of Moses’ return from Midian to Egypt has 
preserved a very old fragment of Hebrew lore. The historian in 
whose narrative the fragment is embodied as a fossil deposit used the 
episode to account for the practice of circumcising infants, which 
was held in later times to be a distinguishing mark of the people of 
Yahweh; but as the core of it and still recognizable are some of the 
most primitive conceptions of the race from which Israel was de- 
scended. 

A wayfarer through the malign and solitary desert, accompanied 
only by wife and child, is set upon at night, in the place where he is 
lodged, by a demon, who seeks to kill him. His wife, daughter of a 
shepherd priest of the steppes, with the quick wit and power to act 
which characterized women of the desert in ancient heroic days, 
knows how to turn aside the anger of the malevolent one. Seizing a 
flint, for such are ready at hand on the barren slopes, she cuts off the 
foreskin of her infant son; and with the bleeding bit of flesh she 

51 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


touches “‘his” person — the person either of her husband or of the 
demon. At the same time she pronounces the magic-working for- 
mula, ‘‘ Now art thou to me a bridegroom of blood!’’ So he let him 
alone. The anger of the evil visitant is appeased, and he vanishes as 
he had come. 

Circumcision was not peculiar to Israel. It was practised by the 
kindred tribes of Edom, Moab, and Ammon, and by the Phoenicians 
and the Arabs. It was known in Egypt before the Hebrews went 
down to sojourn there. It is found among primitive peoples in ex- 
treme parts of the world. The Philistines, from somewhere across the 
sea, were not circumcised; the only Semitic nations who did not prac- 
tise the rite were the Babylonians and Assyrians. The custom 
reaches back into farthest antiquity. Originally, perhaps, it was a 
tribal mark, signifying the youth’s acceptance into full membership 
in his group; it had further a religious meaning, for by this act the in- 
dividual was devoted to the worship and service of the communal 
god. In Israel the rite was transferred from youth to infancy. Under- 
lying the incident of the symbolic circumcision of Moses’ son, is the 
conception of the efficacy of blood, which figures so largely in the be- 
liefs of the desert. The Hebrew writers agree in tracing the origin of 
the custom to the period when the Israelites were shepherds and wan- 
derers. The Priestly author assigns it to Abraham, the Ephraimite 
narrator to Joshua. The story of Zipporah and Moses is much the 
oldest of the Hebrew accounts. In spite of its transformation by the 
early Judahite historian in whose narrative it was introduced for its 
explanatory purpose, the episode, complete in its antique brevity, 
still breathes the wild spirit of its origin. The belief in hostile myste- 
rious beings of air and earth, threatening men capriciously, the reli- 
ance upon the potency of magical act and formula to avert their at- 
tack, the quick resolution of the desert-born woman able to meet and 

52 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


overcome the sudden danger — these traits reveal the genius of 
Israel in its beginnings. And not the least element in that genius 
was its power to transmute the primal crude superstitions of its in- 
heritance into enlightened faith in the justice, righteousness, and 
loving-kindness of the one God. 

Another reminiscence of the desert has a setting in the narratives 
of the oppression in Egypt. On the night when Yahweh went 
through the land to smite all the firstborn of the Egyptians, from the 
firstborn of Pharaoh that sat upon his throne even unto the first- 
born of the maidservant behind the mill, and the firstborn of cat- 
tle, on that terrible night the avenger marvellously spared his own 
people. For the children of Israel had given a sign to the destroyer. 
Instructed by their leader Moses, they performed a solemn ceremony 
against his coming. According to families they took a lamb and 
“killed the passover’’; with a bunch of hyssop dipped in the blood, 
they smeared the lintel and doorposts of their dwellings; and they 
remained indoors until the morning. So Yahweh “passed over”’ the 
houses of the children of Israel in Egypt. 

Many ancient usages survived in the religious practice of Israel 
whose primary meaning had long since been obscured or wholly lost. 
It is characteristic of the narrators that they explained the origin of 
such customs by reference to some historical event or significant epi- 
sode. So circumcision, the Sabbath, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, 
the anointing of the sacred stone in Beth-el, the prohibition against 
eating the sinew of the thigh, — each has its etiological legend. One of 
the oldest feasts among the Israelites was the Passover. In the story 
of the death of the firstborn of Egypt and the escape of the oppressed 
tribes of the Hebrews, the Passover found a signally appropriate oc- 
casion. But it is evident that here, as so often elsewhere, the cus- 
tom created the event. For the Feast of the Passover as observed in 

53 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Israel, was a composite, embodying some of the most primitive rites 
of the shepherd clans of the desert. 

When Moses repeatedly asks of the Pharach that he let the He- 
brews go, and is met by repeated refusals, followed each by a plague 
upon Egypt, he urges as the reason of his demand, “The God of the 
Hebrews hath met with us: let us go, we pray thee, three days’ jour- 
ney into the wilderness, and sacrifice unto Yahweh our God; lest he 
fall upon us with pestilence, or with the sword.”’ The Pharaoh, har- 
assed by a succession of grievous plagues, at length grants permission 
to the Hebrews to hold their sacrifice in the land where they are. But 
Moses objects, “It is not meet so to do; for we shall sacrifice the 
abomination of the Egyptians to Yahweh our God: lo, shall we sacri- 
fice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they 
not stone us? We will go three days’ journey into the wilderness, and 
sacrifice to Yahweh our God, as he shall command us.” 

The sacrifice to which the spokesman of the enslaved tribes thus 
summoned them before the Pharaoh’s presence may well have been 
the spring festival of nomads of the desert. It could be properly ob- 
served only in the land belonging to their god. It was a shepherds’ 
festival, an offering of the firstlings of the flock. With the Passover 
was combined, in the narratives of the exodus and in later Israelite 
usage, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, an offering of the first fruits of 
the ground. But though the symbolism of the two rites was similar, 
the Feast of Unleavened Bread was an agricultural festival, adopted 
by Israel only after the settlement in Canaan. The ancient Passover, 
observed by families within a tribe, had a peculiarly domestic charac- 
ter; and in the same spirit it was cherished in Israel. It was at once 
a sacrifice and a feast: for it was customary among shepherds to 
slaughter only for sacrifice; and the accompanying meal shared by 
the god and his worshippers in common served to reunite the tribe 

54 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


with its god for the coming year. Vitally inwrought with the cere- 
mony of the Passover was the old conception, universal and eternal 
in the desert, of the efficacy of blood. The night of this festival of the 
full moon of spring, held after sundown in the middle of the first 
month, was a night.of danger, when the destroyer was abroad and 
must be placated; it was enjoined upon the Israelites as a night of 
watching unto Yahweh. So in the solemn dark, the blood of the sacri- 
fice was smeared on the tent door, averting the threat of hostile 
beings that might lie in wait to strike, perhaps some demon of 
the plague: — “lest he fall upon us with pestilence, or with the 
sword!” 

So ancient was this shepherds’ festival of Passover that the mean- 
ing of the Hebrew term for it cannot be adequately explained. The 
name — as is probably also true of the name, Yahweh — goes back to 
the primal speech of the desert from which the Hebrew language was 
descended. In the ceremonies of this world-old ancestral feast may 
be traced the beginnings of beliefs and ritual observances, which after 
centuries of residence in a more favored land and of a richer, more 
complex way of life still lmked the Israelites with their origins. 
Though the prophets proclaimed a God who delighted not in sacri- 
fices and offerings and feasts and solemn assemblies, yet the people 
were ever tenacious of their ancient familiar customs. Yahweh was 
still to them their old God, who left his home in the steppes to dwell 
with them in the land they had won by conquest, indeed with the 
very help of Yahweh, God of battle-hosts, and who demanded as of 
yore the blood of the sacrifice. At times the people, perhaps not wit- 
tingly, had changed allegiance from Yahweh to the baals of Canaan, 
but they kept their antique feasts. 

In later ages the Passover acquired more and more a memorial 
character. It became to the Israelites and increasingly to the Jews 


99 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the symbol and remembrance of the power of Yahweh manifested to 
his chosen people in the great deliverance. To-day throughout the 
world, wherever they may be, the descendants of the primal desert 
tribes, in the middle of the first month of spring, gather by families in 
their dwellings after sundown to keep the Passover. The children 
ask, “What mean ye by this service ?”’ And the father answers, “It 
is the sacrifice of Yahweh’s Passover, who passed over the houses of 
the children of Israel in Egypt.”’ From now back to eldest beginnings 
are how many thousands of years! This fidelity to racial type and 
loyalty to tradition, which millennia might transform but could not 
eradicate, traits unparalleled in any other people except the kindred 
Arabs, are of the essence of the temper of Israel. To its power to en- 
dure, annealed in the fires of sun-stricken sands, Israel owed in large 
measure its peculiar history. | 


After the fleeing tribes had made good their escape from Egypt, 
they journeyed through the wilderness, and at length reached the 
oasis of Kadesh. There they lingered for some years. And thence 
they set out for the conquest of Canaan. 

The stories of this momentous period, retold in successive ages 
with ever greater intricacy, are a tangled skein. Interwoven of shreds 
loosely jomed, appearing in duplicate or discordant passages, the 
course of events may be unravelled with only a chance of finding the 
right clue. The duration of the sojourn in the wilderness is uncer- 
tain; perhaps it was a generation. The route followed by the Hebrews 
cannot be traced definitely. Incidents are recounted as happening 
vaguely along the march, though indeed the names are cited of 
places in the desert known to the Israelites. Many of the places, so 
far as they can be identified, are in the vicinity of Kadesh. The le- 
gends attaching to them are made to serve as explanations of the 

56 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


names; and the episodes were used by the writers to fill out and em- 
bellish the stories of the wilderness, which otherwise were so lacking 
in actuality and genuinely historical character. Suddenly the tortu- 
ous flow of narrative is blocked by the dense mass of legal enactment 
and formula given at Sinai, which extends with its setting of incident 
relative to the legislation, from the nineteenth chapter of Exodus 
through the whole of Leviticus to the tenth chapter of Numbers; at 
this point the narrative resumes its seeming continuity, but the guid- 
ing thread is still beyond sure recovery. Yet all the versions agree 
that at some time the Hebrews sojourned in Kadesh, though the in- 
creasing emphasis in after generations upon events at Sinai tended to 
efface the real significance of this oasis, sacred immemorially to wan- 
derers in the wilderness of the south. Out of endless uncertainties of 
time and place emerges at last the probability that Kadesh, with its 
pasture lands and streams of living water, was the great scene of 
Moses’ work for Israel. 

South of Canaan and thence southwestward is spread the region of 
steppes which the Israelites knew as the Wilderness of Zin and of 
Paran. In its interminable reaches of limestone hills sown with 
flints and but the sparsest vegetation, it is “one of the most inhospit- 
able of all deserts — one which, since the Mohammedan invasion, 
has been an unenvied resort of defeated tribes too weak to face the 
strenuous life of the greater deserts.” “Only in one place in all this 
country is there a stream of real running water that can serve for irri- 
gation — in the little valley of Ain el Guderat [close by Kadesh], 
where for two or three miles fields of corn and spreading trees refresh 
the eyes wearied by the glare of the sun on white ground and polished 
flints, and by the uniform grey scrub on bare hillsides and in grey- 
brown valleys. ... In summer it is blisteringly hot, and in the winter 
cold with the unbridled cold of an abandoned country over which the 

57 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


wind can rage in unchecked fury.” ! In the heart of this region, some 
fifty miles south of Beer-sheba and less than two hundred miles from 
the borders of Egypt, was the great oasis of Kadesh. Only here, 
along the desert march of the Hebrews, were water and pasturage 
enough to maintain them for any considerable time. As its name in- 
dicates, Kadesh was a holy place. Oasis and sanctuary, it was fre- 
quented also by tribes friendly to the Hebrews, if not linked with 
them by ties of kinship. To the east, on the mountain range of Seir, 
lay Edom, who was Esau, elder twin-brother of Jacob. To the king 
of Edom Moses sent messengers: “Thus saith thy brother Israel... 
Behold, we are in Kadesh, a city in the uttermost of thy border.” 
Southeast of Kadesh, Midian had its seat. Hither Moses had fled 
from Egypt in his youth and married the daughter of the tribal 
priest. Back — or west — of the wilderness of Midian was Horeb, 
whence, according to one version, Yahweh revealed his name to 
Moses: and on the way between Midian and Egypt, according to an- 
other account, Moses heard the voice of Yahweh out of the burning 
bush. When therefore Moses, as spokesman of the Hebrews, asked 
leave of the Pharaoh to withdraw three days’ journey into the wilder- 
ness to sacrifice unto Yahweh, it may be that the goal he set for his 
people was the ancient sanctuary of Kadesh, in a region where it is 
implied the worship of Yahweh was already known. 

Against the vague, shifting phantom background of the wilderness 
that recedes into unreckonable distance, the awesome figure of 
Moses, solidly imagined, commands events. A man of God, later 
generations conceived him to be, in fullest measure, having plenary 
power to work marvels; with ever-augmented glory in fervent recol- 
lection, he was priest, prophet, lawgiver, the savior of the tribes, the 
creator of the nation. The farther each epoch was removed in time, 


1 Woolley and Lawrence: ‘‘The Wilderness of Zin,” P. E. F. Annual, 1914. 
58 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


the more of its inheritance and own achievement it imputed to the ef- 
fective agency of Moses. To him Yahweh communicated the Ten 
Words, inscribed on two tables of stone. The Book of the Covenant 
(Ex. 20 20-23 33), the oldest code of Hebrew law, in written form 
dating from the period of the monarchy, was fitted into the story of 
his work. Explicitly assigned to his authorship was the legislation 
promulgated in the reign of Josiah, toward the end of the seventh 
century. And finally the enormous mass of ritual prescriptions and 
civil ordinances formulated by priests after the Exile was ascribed to 
his inspired utterance. 

Increasingly in the view of later generations, the crucial event of 
the wilderness sojourn was the giving of the Law. By the instrumen- 
tality of Moses, Yahweh made known his will. According to the nar- 
ratives as finally compiled, the scene was the Mount of God, Sinai or 
Horeb. Here from unremembered ancientness Yahweh, God of fire 
and cloud and earthquake, had his seat. In one of the oldest poems 
surviving in Israel it is written: 


Yahweh, when thou wentest forth out of Seir, 

When thou marchedst out of the field of Edom, 

The earth trembled, the heavens also dropped, 

Yea, the clouds dropped water. 

The mountains quaked at the presence of Yahweh, 

Even yon Sinai at the presence of Yahweh, the God of Israel. 


Of similar tenor a poem composed when Israel was long since estab- 
lished in Canaan under a king voices a distant reminiscence: 


Yahweh came from Sinai, 

And beamed forth unto them from Seir; 
He shined forth from mount Paran, 
And he came [to Meribath-Kadesh?] 


So the mountainous region eastward of Kadesh was the home of Yah- 

weh of old time. Here Yahweh spoke to Moses out of the burning 

bush. The word for bush, seneh, used only in this connection, holds in 
59 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


its likeness to Sinai the play upon words characteristic of a height- 
ened moment of Hebrew style. The volcanic nature of the region 
might well give rise to the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire 
by night which seemed to guide the Hebrews through the wilderness. 
Volcanic also are the phenomena that attended the theophanies of 
Yahweh on Sinai, the thunders and lightnings and thick cloud. 
‘*And mount Sinai, the whole of it, smoked because Yahweh de- 
scended upon it in fire, and the whole mount quaked greatly.” “And 
the appearance of the glory of Yahweh was like devouring fire on the 
top of the mount.” 

Therefore in far retrospect, the towering bulk of Sinai, holy moun- 
tain of Yahweh, dominated the wilderness. As in the physical proc- 
esses of nature, clouds gathered about its head fraught with light- 
ning and tempest, so in virtue of its spiritual import dreadful and 
mysterious, this Mount of God attracted to itself all the traditions 
of fateful happenings when Yahweh chose the wandering tribes to 
be his people. Doubtless an influence streamed from Sinai which 
reached the sojourners in the oasis of Kadesh; for there on the 
mount, remote, God had his habitation. But it is probable that in 
the more primitive conception, as the poems represent, Yahweh him- 
self came from Sinai to the people in Kadesh. To a later age it 
seemed more fitting that the people should betake themselves to the 
sacred mountain to receive God’s revelation and commandments; so 
that events which happened actually at Kadesh were transferred by 
the narrators to Sinai. Likewise, the crucial achievements of Israel in 
its beginnings, which the narratives figure as single decisive acts of 
Yahweh at his holy mountain, were in reality a gradual develop- 
ment, wrought out of the necessities of the new conditions in which 
the Hebrews found themselves as they were encamped on the borders 
of Canaan. Israel was not a creation but a growth. 

60 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


Most of the legislation attributed to Moses is manifestly the prod- 
uct of after ages, for it presupposes the conditions of life of an agri- 
cultural people already advanced in the complex social relationships 
of a long-established civilization. In the various groups of laws, none 
of which received written form until after the institution of the mon- 
archy, may still be traced a few survivals or memories of ancient des- 
ert custom. A group of commands, cited by the Ephraimite writer in 
Exodus 20 23f. and 23, and paralleled in the Judahite version in Exo- 
dus 34, embodies three prescripts which relate to usages at a period 
when the Hebrews were still nomads. “The first-born of thy sons 
shalt thou give unto me. Likewise shalt thou do with [thy ox and] 
thy sheep.” “The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the 
morning.” “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk.” 
These ritualistic commands are probably older than Israel’s worship 
of Yahweh. In civil and criminal law, there is little in substance that 
Moses may be thought to have originated. The principle of retalia- 
tion or compensation, a life for a life, an eye for an eye, underlying He- 
brew practice, was the very foundation of the most primitive desert 
justice. The commands against murder, theft, adultery, and false 
witness, cited in the decalogues of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, 
have parallels in the code of Hammurabi, a thousand years before 
Moses. And yet, the successive givings of the Law — in variant ver- 
sions of the Ten Words, in the promulgation of the detailed codes of 
legislation and ritual prescription — so, too, Moses’ several visits to 
the top of the mountain to receive God’s commands, finally all the 
marvellous circumstances attending the converse of Yahweh with his 
people, these are but symbols and the imaginative reconstruction of 
a great central fact. During the sojourn in the wilderness, the He- 
brews were given a new revelation and understanding of Yahweh; and 
Israel received certain primary and germinal forms of its law. The 

61 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Torah, or “direction” of Yahweh, communicated by Moses, how: 
ever rudimentary, constituted the nucleus of that ethical law, whose 
unfolding with a power of universal and eternal application was Is- 
rael’s service to the world. Though no single detail of the great body 
of Hebrew law given in the Pentateuch can be certainly ascribed to 
Moses, yet it was not without reason that each new code in succeed- 
ing centuries was promulgated in his name. For he founded a princi- 
ple which was capable of extension to all the increasing needs of a 
people in the fullest development of their distinctive civilization. 
The Torah, instituted by Moses, supplied the form and method of all 
later legislation. By his instrumentality, the “custom”’ of the desert 
was superseded by the “law of God.” Thus early in Israel’s history 
were established a tradition and a practice which served in after ages 
to support the spiritual leaders of the nation as they won an ever wid- 
ening scope for the fulfilment of justice and righteousness. 

In the view of later generations, when Yahweh, through the medi- 
ation of Moses, revealed himself by name to the Hebrews, disclosing 
thus the very secret of his being, by that act of special favor he chose 
Israel to be his people. He delivered them from Egyptian bondage. 
The deliverance accomplished, he laid commandments upon them. 
The Hebrews, on their part, acknowledged Yahweh to be their God. 
He had proved his might, greater than all other power. His com- 
mandments, therefore, they accepted as the law of their God. “All 
that Yahweh hath spoken we will do.”’ Hereupon followed a covenant 
between Yahweh and his people. For so, ancient usage ordained in 
_ transactions of great moment; lacking the compulsions of formal ex- 
ternal authority, the parties to an agreement bound themselves by a 
covenant to the performance of mutual obligations. Accordingly the 
Hebrews’ acceptance of Yahweh’s sovereign law was ratified by a sol- 
emn covenant. As leader and representative of the people, Moses 


62 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


officiated on their behalf. Building an altar and twelve pillars, he 
sent young men of the children of Israel who offered burnt offerings 
unto Yahweh. 

And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of 
the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the cov- 
enant [containing Yahweh’s laws], and read in the audience of the 
people: and they said, All that Yahweh hath spoken will we do, and 
be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the peo- 
ple, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which Yahweh hath 
made with you upon all these words. 


Faithfully picturing the antique practice, and vivid, such glimpses of 
actuality, rare and like living water and green places in the dry 
reaches of legal formula, bring dim figures out of the shadows of dis- 
tance into present image and movement. Now follows a passage of 
singular charm. The quick imagination is loosed to range through 
the splendors of heaven; then with no sense of transition in effect, it 
falls sharply to earth and the ways of men. 

Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy 
of the elders of Israel: and they saw the God of Israel; and there was 
under his feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and as it 
were the very heaven for clearness. And upon the nobles of the chil- 


dren of Israel he laid not his hand: and they beheld God, and did eat 
and drink. 


In terms of a mutual agreement, hallowed by the blood of the sacri- 
fice and communion of God and people, Israel conceived its special 
and peculiar relationship to Yahweh. Other tribes were linked with 
their deities by the bond of natural kinship. Yahweh by his free act 
had chosen Israel to be his people; Israel of its own will accepted 
Yahweh as its God. The covenant in the wilderness, so Israel pas- 
sionately believed, was the charter of the nation and the deepest 
secure foundation of its religion. 
63 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Although tradition and record tended more and more to concen- 
trate the crucial events of the wilderness upon the scene at the Mount 
of God, the early narratives have preserved incidents which hap- 
pened probably at Kadesh. This oasis was in the vicinity of Midian. 
It was in the land of Midian that Yahweh first revealed himself to 
Moses. Thither Moses had fled from Egypt; there he had married 
the daughter of the priest. In this region the Hebrews encamped af- 
ter their deliverance; and here Jethro, priest of Midian and Moses’ 
father-in-law, came to visit them, for he had heard how that Yahweh 
had brought Israel out of Egypt. In the best antique manner, with a 
few simple strokes, the little story traces the free sweeping line of no- 
mad courtesy in highest expression. Against the vague background 
of unbounded spaces, it throws into bright relief the innate dignity 
and plastic grace of figures in open air. 


Now Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife 
unto Moses into the wilderness.... And Moses went out to meet 
his father-in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him; and they asked 
each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent. And Moses 
told his father-in-law all that Yahweh had done unto Pharaoh and to 
the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the travail that had come upon 
them by the way, and how Yahweh delivered them. And Jethro re- 
joiced for all the goodness which Yahweh had done to Israel, in 
that he had delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians. And 
Jethro said, 

Blessed be Yahweh, 

Who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, 

And out of the hand of Pharaoh. 

Now I know that Yahweh is greater than all gods: 

Yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them. 

And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices 
for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread 
with Moses’ father-in-law before God. 

64 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


Thus the occasion, at once intimate and ceremonious, reaches its 
climax, as the Bedawy custom is, in sacrifice and feasting. Jethro 
slays a lamb, which he offers to the deity in fire upon the altar. 
Therewith the priest, and the elders of the tribe whose guest he is, 
gather about the sacrificial meal. Noteworthy, however, is the fact 
that it is not Moses but Jethro who conducts the sacrifice. Aaron and 
the elders of Israel participate, but Moses himself is not mentioned. 
Doubtless the narrative preserved the true tradition: but to a later 
age it seemed unfitting that Moses should play a part subordinate 
to the priest of another tribe; and therefore the easiest method of 
obviating the difficulty was to omit Moses’ name altogether. It 
is assumed further that an altar to Yahweh is already at hand; so 
his worship was known at this sanctuary before the Hebrews came. 
Moreover, their god is acknowledged also by the priest of Midian, 
for he says, ‘Now I know that Yahweh is greater than all gods!” 
The implications of the legend, then, point to the region of Midian 
as the original home of Yahweh. And it was during their sojourn at 
Kadesh that the Hebrews were initiated by the Midianites into the 
rites of Yahweh worship. 

But this was not the only service of Midian to Israel. On the mor- 
row of Jethro’s arrival, Moses resumes his daily task. He sits in judg- 
ment for his people; and the people stand about him from the morn- 
ing till the evening. Remarking the press of causes upon him which is 
like to wear away even his superb energy, Jethro protests decisively 
that Moses is not able to carry so great a burden alone; and he sug- 
gests that Moses provide out of all the people able men, such as fear 
God, men of truth, hating unjust gain — here echoes the voice of the 
great prophets of later centuries — and place such over them, to be 
rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, of fifties and tens, to judge 
the people at all seasons. Every great matter they shall bring to 

65 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Moses, but every small matter they shall judge themselves. Com- 
plaisantly Moses heeds the counsel of the priest of Midian. 

So the ancient desert tribe of the Midianites, whose home was but 
a few days’ march from Canaan, were the teachers of Israel in social 
administration and in religion. Such is the import of these early nar- 
ratives. But herewith the query propounds itself inevitably: If Yah- 
weh was Midian’s god before he was the god of Israel, why was it that 
Israel and not Midian was the bearer of a religion whose God was to 
overcome the yet unknown western world? The answer is unfolded 
step by faltering step in the long development of Israel’s genius. 


The story of Jethro’s visit pictures Moses in the act of declaring 
the law. When the people have a matter in dispute, they come to 
Moses to inquire of God: he judges between a man and his neighbor; 
and he makes them to know the statutes of God and his laws. In Is- 
rael, to “inquire of God” was to seek a decision by recourse to the 
oracle or sacred lot, which lay in the custody of the priest. The deci- 
sion thus made known was the Torah of Yahweh. As entrusted with 
the lot, therefore, Moses officiates as priest. Concerning the priest- 
hood, personified in Levi, it is said in a poem composed in the time of 
the monarchy but placed on the lips of Moses, 

Thy Thummim and thy Urim are with thy godly one. 
They [the sons of Levi] shall teach Jacob thy judgments, 
And Israel thy law. 


The Thummim and Urim, together with the Ephod, were employed in 

the casting of the sacred lot. The use of the oracle is mentioned fre- 

quently in the historical narratives down through the reign of David. 

Later, with the gradual spiritualizing of the religion of Yahweh, it 

came into disfavor with the great prophetic teachers of the nation, 

though they still allude to it. The Ephod and the Thummim and Urim 
66 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


were appurtenances of the official dress of the High Priest in post- 
exilic Judaism, but their significance in that age was traditional and 
symbolic. Though resort to the sacred lot seems therefore to have 
lapsed, its importance for the beginnings of the Israelite nation was 
immense. The practice of seeking to know the will of Yahweh, in 
cases for which there was no precedent, constituted the basis for the 
whole development of Hebrew law. The case, once thus decided, 
thereupon furnished a precedent; and thence were evolved the formal 
judgments termed the statutes and ordinances of God. It was char- 
acteristic of Israel to identify the commandments of Yahweh with all 
law, applying to every relation of life, with civil and criminal law no 
less than ceremonial and moral. All requirements formulated as law 
were equally of divine inspiration and decree. So Moses was at once 
priest, judge, and legislator. The great body of commandments, 
judgments, statutes and ordinances which the narratives ascribe to 
revelation by Yahweh in the thunders of Sinai may well have had 
its really historical origin in the oracles of God, however few and 
primary, communicated by the agency of Moses to the people at 
Kadesh. At this ancient sanctuary in the wilderness, Moses laid the 
foundation of Hebrew justice. 

But the people were not always amenable to the will of God, made 
known to them by Moses. They were a “mixed multitude,” these 
wanderers, who had come up out of servitude in Egypt: perhaps the 
Hebrews in their escape had swept along with them aliens like them- 
selves who had been forced to task work, and with these aliens also 
the flotsam of other tribes adrift on the Egyptian border. Often they 
murmured at the hardships of the wilderness. The rabble among 
them, ever unruly, lusted exceedingly, clamoring for more substan- 
tial fare than the desert could supply; and even the children of Israel 
wept, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? We remember the 

67 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


good things of Egypt, but now our very life is dried away! Time and 
again, when the people suffered want of water, they reproached their 
leader: Wherefore hast thou brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us 
and our children with thirst? And they were ready to stone him. 
But in every crisis, Moses aided by his converse with God was able to 
rescue them out of their distress. When they came to a spring that 
proved to be bitter, he cast into it a branch of a tree that God showed 
him, and the water was made sweet. Again, with his wonder-working 
staff, he smote a rock, and water gushed forth in abundance. When 
they hungered, Moses interceded with God, who miraculously pro- 
vided them bread and meat. Manna, small flakes like hoar frost on 
the ground, rained down from heaven as the dew; and a wind from 
the sea, sent by Yahweh, brought quails in such measure that the 
people sickened with excess. In the absence of their leader, the peo- 
ple were ever forward to break loose. One episode, recounted in a 
strand of narrative not of the earliest, may yet have been typical of 
their rebelliousness. When they saw that Moses delayed to come 
down from the mount, they gathered themselves together unto 
Aaron, and said, Up, make us a god which shall go before us; for as 
for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, 
we know not what is become of him. And Aaron, out of the gold de- 
spoiled from the Egyptians, fashioned a molten calf, and he built an 
altar before it. And the people rose up early on the morrow, and of- 
fered burnt offerings; and they sat down to eat and to drink, and 
they rose up to play. 

So Moses’ charge was not an easy one, to control the crowd of fugi- 
tives whom he led through the wilderness. Yet by his administrative 
skill he found means to bring a kind of order from the confusion. 
Upon the counsel, so it is narrated, of his father-in-law, the priest of 
Midian, he appointed rulers of thousands, of hundreds, fifties, and 

68 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


tens. Historically, the same form of communal division obtained 
among the Edomites, the Arabs of the desert, and indeed the Philis- 
tines. In Israel it continued far down into the kingdom, but its origin 
dates back to the nomadic period. As the rulers served not only as 
judges but as officers of the people, the tribes were thus organized for 
war, which the immediate future held in store for them. Quite as im- 
portant as a formal organization of their numbers, however, was the 
awakened consciousness of a common purpose that Moses impressed 
upon them. In the worship of Yahweh, accepted by the Hebrews in 
the wilderness, lay the compelling unifying force which at length 
wrought the Hebrew tribes into the nation of Israel. 

Perhaps some of the mixed multitude never merged in the group 
that Moses labored prodigiously to fashion, but drifted apart again 
into the desert. Even among the clans of true Hebrew strain were 
turbulent spirits who rebelled against the authority of the sheikh. On 
one occasion two men of the tribe of Reuben dared publicly to defy 
Moses’ judicial prerogatives. They refused to answer his summons, 
saying, “We will not come up; is it a small thing that thou hast 
brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey, to kill us in 
the wilderness, but thou must needs make thyself also a prince over 
us?” Apparently they accused Moses of perverting justice, for he 
made defence before Yahweh, “Respect not thou their offering: I 
have not taken one ass from them, neither have I hurt one of them.” 
The reference to the offering by the rebels might imply that they had 
sought to hold converse with Yahweh independently of the media- 
tion of Moses as priest. The scene that follows is tremendous. For 
the quarrel was more than a merely private dispute. As a matter 
which concerned his whole influence with the people, Moses brought 
to bear on it all the weight of majesty attaching to his office. At- 
tended by the elders, he repaired in state to the quarter of the camp 

69 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


where the offenders had their tents. A crowd having gathered to see 
the outcome, Moses ordered them to disperse. “And Dathan and 
Abiram came out, and stood at the door of their tents, and their 
wives, and their sons, and their little ones.” Then Moses, solemnly 
invoking Yahweh, called down divine judgment upon the recalci- 
trants. The authority of Moses was vindicated in the event: for an 
earthquake opened a cleft in the ground which swallowed up the in- 
surgents and all their households, and they went down alive into 
Sheol. And the earth closed upon them. Another time, Moses’ title 
as the prophet of Yahweh was challenged by Aaron, traditional an- 
cestor of the priests, and by Miriam, sister of Moses and herself a 
prophetess. Again Yahweh intervened and reéstablished the pri- 
macy of Moses. 

| These legends are capable of various interpretations. Events of 
tribal significance are often represented in the narratives of Israel’s 
beginnings in terms of the acts of individuals. So Dathan and Abi- 
ram, of the tribe of Reuben, may typify the pretensions of the oldest 
among the sons of Jacob to bear the leadership. So too, Aaron is 
made to authenticate the rights and privileges of the priesthood. 
Moses himself is the inclusive concrete presentment of all that Israel 
accomplished in this momentous period of its history. From another 
angle, however, it is possible to discern in these episodes more than a 
mere symbol and generalization; they are a record of realities. The 
loose, inconstant rabble, yearning back to the flesh-pots of Egypt, 
lived on into later generations, the scorn and despair of the prophets. 
But the desert furnished a stouter metal, which ages had tempered 
and which men of genius forged to great uses. Thus the rebels in the 
‘ camp are true to form, for their defiance breathes the ungovernable 
' spirit of their race, which does not willingly submit to authority. Is- 
rael was always characterized by a strong individualism. Not only 

70 


WILDERNESS WANDERINGS 


was its strength never comparable to that of Egypt and Babylonia, 
lacking their numbers, but the national life rested on wholly different 
foundations. The mighty states imposed by sheer mass, directed 
from above. Israel won its place by the personal force of its great 
men. Of these, Moses was the first. The kind of material in which 
he worked explains the difficulties and the possibilities of his task. 
What he achieved with it was the measure of his own powers and an 
earnest of Israel’s future. The labors of Moses forecast the history of 
the nation. 


In the wilderness south of Canaan the Hebrews lingered for a gen- 
eration. Great things had happened, whose importance perhaps the 
people did not realize; for they lived the life of any desert tribe, fortu- 
nate at the moment in the possession of water and grazing land. But 
with increase of numbers, their oasis at Kadesh no longer sufficed for 
their needs. To the north a wonderful country invited them, a land 
flowing with milk and honey. They remembered that of old time 
their fathers had pitched their tents in Canaan, before they went 
down into Egypt and suffered bondage. Now once again conquest 
seemed possible; for more closely knit than when they had fled from 
their oppressors, they were organized for war. Their god too, whose 
worship they had newly accepted, already had shown himself power- 
ful, in that he had mightily delivered them from Egypt and brought 
them through the perils of the wilderness to the water courses of their 
present home. In the name of Yahweh, God of war, they set forward. 

But Canaan was not easily to be won. 


V 
THE PROMISED LAND 


Tue Empires of Egypt and Babylonia rose and flourished along the 
prodigal valleys of great rivers. The little land of Canaan is but the 
continued thrust of the desert descending to the sea. Severed by the 
deep cleft of the rushing Jordan from the rocky headlands that fall 
away eastward illimitably into the Arabian sands, the strip of coast is 
wrested from the wastes by the moist winds of ocean and the few 
water-courses that impregnate the lower levels. Desert and oasis, 
highland wilderness and luxuriant mead, compressed in abrupt com- 
bination and contrast, — the violent diversity of the country is ac- 
centuated by the smallness of the scale. A day’s journey may range 
from tropic heat to icy cold. The snows of Hermon overlook the 
green expanse of Esdraelon; along the shore, mountains crowd a 
narrow plain into the sea; and other fertile reaches are but intervals 
among the barren hills. Neighbored by mighty states, a territory 
so confined in area, so broken of surface, and divided against itself in 
all its parts, had no chance of worldly greatness, no hope of imperial 
dominion. Yet Canaan seemed to adventurers fleeing their parched 
withholding sands to be a land flowing with milk and honey. And 
this little country has fostered as its own many vagrant tribes which 
the desert mother could not sustain. 

Before invaders came from the desert, Canaan was already 
peopled. Its first tenants have left as their only record rude flint in- 
struments such as man fashioned in his beginnings. A later age re- 
veals traces of another passing. At Gezer, on the edge of the mari- 
time plain, a race of small stature lived in caves, partly natural, 

72 


THE PROMISED LAND 


partly hewn out of the soft limestone with tools of flint. Were the 
Horites, whom Israel-seemed to remember from far-off times, a sur- 
vival of these ancient cave-dwellers? Larger in frame than they and 
therefore of a different stock, a people of a yet later period, in Gal- 
ilee, in the South, and in the country east of Jordan, reared groups 
of megalithic monuments; and great caves cut as labyrinthine 
chambers may also be their work. Perhaps their descendants were 
the giant folk of whom the Hebrew spies brought back to Moses a 
terrifying report at the border of the promised land; and echoes of 
such a stalwart race resound in the literature of Israel. 

In the fourth millennium a great migration from Arabia brought 
the Semites into Canaan. The newcomers built cities, defended by 
walls and towers, arming themselves with the club, the bow, and the 
lance. With edged flint they ploughed and reaped; they gathered 
fruit of the fig-tree, and cultivated the vine. Of clay they moulded 
jugs, bowls, and lamps, which reveal a dawning sense of beautiful 
form. Henceforward the peoples of Canaan were mainly Semitic; 
breaking in as nomads from the desert, each successive group of in- 
vaders with time became attached to the soil. But the civilization 
which they developed throughout the two millennia before the 
Hebrews came, reaping where they had not sown, was ever subject 
to influences from other lands. 

For Canaan spread across the path of empire. From Babylonia 
the highway of conquest and trade led northwestward through 
Mesopotamia, then turned south into Syria to follow the strip of 
lowland along the sea; from Egypt the stream rising far in the south 
swept east across the peninsula of Sinai, and thence northward by 
the coast, meeting the drift from the east in the narrow plains of 
Canaan. Along this course the flow and ebb of mightier peoples up 
and down her confines between mountains and sea made the history 

73 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


of the country. Continuously the prey and battle-ground of greater 
states, Canaan never became a nation. 

Already in the opening centuries of the third millennium, Egypt, 
now a united kingdom, was reaching out to Canaan and beyond to 
Syria, to lay the rich products of those countries under tribute to its 
increasing magnificence. Snefru, about 2900 B.c., last king of the 
Third Dynasty and builder of the earliest pyramid, brought cedar- 
wood from Lebanon. A document of the Sixth Dynasty reveals a 
swift glimpse of the Canaanite scene: it is reported that in the course 
of a military expedition sent by the Pharaoh Pepi I, “the castles were 
destroyed, the fig-trees and vines cut down, and the farmsteads 
burned.” And to the same effect, the wall of a contemporary tomb 
chamber shows an attack by Egyptian troops against a fortified city 
of the Semites. A wall-painting in a later time, about 1900, depicts a 
visit in Egypt of Canaanite merchants, laden with their wares. In 
exchange for the products of their own land, they must have brought 
home things of use and beauty wrought by the cunning craftsmen of 
Egypt, which might serve as models for native artisans. Objects of 
Egyptian workmanship dug from the soil of Canaan are at once 
material evidence of the contact of the two countries and a symbol of 
the influence which the Empire of the Nile exerted upon a lesser 
people through an intercourse of centuries. 

Farther than Egypt from the Westland in distance, yet Baby- 
lonia was more closely linked with Canaan by community of race. 
For the Semites, although they yielded during long periods to in- 
vading peoples, persistently maintained their supremacy in the 
Tigris-Euphrates valley. The culture which their Empire diffused 
throughout the eastern world stamped with its own distinctive and 
consummate impress the ruder life of a kindred people in a less 


favored land. Its armies and its caravans, flung across Mesopo- 
74 


THE PROMISED LAND 


tamia and Canaan to the border of Egypt, carried with them the 
manner of thinking and the arts wrought out through ages in opulent 
plains. The Babylonian language and script became the interna- 
tional medium of diplomacy and commerce. In Canaan, architecture 
and handiwork were fashioned after patterns derived from the Em- 
pire. The laws of Babylonia, even though imposed upon the coast- 
land by force of conquest, found occasion and acceptance among a 
people of like origin and temper. Gods of the imperial pantheon 
were welcomed in the western province; and myths and legends 
originating in the valley of the Two Rivers passed to Canaan and 
became a common possession. To this culture the Hebrew invaders 
fell heir. Israel’s struggle to maintain itself against Canaanite 
example and influence, therefore, was ultimately a contest with 
Babylonia. 


The uncertain lights of earliest dawn reveal the alluvial plain 
northwards from the Persian Gulf as already settled by a race whose 
origins remain unknown. By the time the dynastic Egyptians had 
established themselves along the Nile, before 3400 B.c., the people of 
this eastern land of Sumer had developed a complex civilization. 
The territory was divided among a group of mutually independent 
city-states, chief among which were Eridu, Ur — whence Abraham 
is fabled to have gone forth — Larsa, Erech, and Nippur. Cultiva- 
tors of the soil, this people constructed an elaborate system of canals. 
They built of brick great temples to their gods; and they were skilled 
in sculpture, metal-casting, engraving, and the art of inlaying both 
with metal and with stone. They invented a system of writing with 
wedge-shaped characters, the cuneiform, which their conquerors in a 
later age adopted and made the current script of their world. As one 
city and then another rose to preéminence, at length Lugalzaggisi, 

75 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


king of Erech, won for his domain the overlordship of all Sumer; and 
beyond that, as he celebrates in an inscription, his god Enlil gave 
him “‘the kingdom of the world” and “made straight his path from 
the Lower Sea of the Tigris and Euphrates to the Upper Sea”’ — 
from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean. Thus early were the 
ways opened that led to the coastland of the West. 

North of Sumer lay the territory of Akkad, now peopled by 
Semites. Thence conquering the entire plain, they founded the 
Babylonian Empire. With their advance southward, they absorbed 
the Sumerian people, and turned to their own uses important 
elements of the earlier civilization. To this fusion of races originally 
distinct may be due in large measure the high development and 
world-compelling influence of Babylonian culture. 

In the rise of the great Semitic empire which at length spread its 
dominion from the Tigris to the Nile, the first name to stand out pre- 
eminent is that of Sharrukin or Sargon I, king of Agade, coupled with 
that of a successor whom later chroniclers called his son, Naram-Sin 
(2800-2700). Sargon gave imperial scope to the group of valley 
kingdoms. His conquests, supplemented by those of Naram-Sin, ex- 
tended into Elam across the Tigris, to Armenia in the north, and to 
the shore of the Mediterranean. The sovereignty, however, passed 
from Sargon’s line to other cities successively. As the warrior is 
followed by the trader, the craftsman, and the colonist, so the 
march of Sargon’s armies pointed the way for the commerce of 
Gudea, prince of Shipurla, or Lagash (2450), who brought from far 
distant countries stone, metals, and rare woods for the building of 
palaces and temples. From the rise of Sumer, revealed to history 
early in the fourth millennium, to the fall of Babylon at the attack 
of the Persian Cyrus, in 538 B.c., this reaching out of the East to- 
ward the West for military conquest and trade inspires the ambitions 

76 


THE PROMISED LAND 


of the kingdoms and empires that flourished and declined in the 
Euphrates valley for more than three thousand years. 

Not long after 2500, the supremacy of the now native Semitic 
kings was broken by invaders from Elam, who had in their own right 
achieved a civilization in their mountain home. Issuing thence, they 
descended upon Babylonia, plundering as they came, and they finally 
established themselves in the plains which the Semites had made 
their own. Meanwhile the Arabian desert had stirred mightily again, 
and pushed forth hordes of virile but hungering tribes. Some, west- 
ward, drifted into Canaan, merging there with a people whose an- 
cestors were likewise sprung from the wastes. Others poured into 
Mesopotamia, and beyond, into Babylonia. Founding a powerful 
dynasty in Babylon, these western Semites drove the Elamites 
from the country, and made their capital the sovereign city of the 
Empire. 

Sixth king of the new line was Hammurabi (2100), whose reign dis- 
tinguished him less as a world-conqueror than as an administrator 
and law-giver. The scattered forces of the Empire he gathered once 
more into unity, under the supremacy of his city of Babylon. Con- 
cerned chiefly for social and economic welfare, he built greatly; and 
by an immense system of canals, he ensured the fertility of the land, 
the real basis of the national prosperity. The supreme witness to his 
genius is his “Code.’’ Embracing some three hundred laws which 
deal with property rights, business transactions, slavery, and all 
family and social relations, the Code expresses a ripe and highly or- 
dered civilization. The principles underlying its enactments must 
have influenced the Law of Israel which began to take form a millen- 
nium later, for the parallels are too close to be merely accidental. 
Flood-tide of merited felicity at home and streaming influence 
abroad, the reign of Hammurabi was the golden age of Babylon. 

77 


‘THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Then followed a period of about four hundred years ruled by kings 
of Hammurabi’s line or race. Documents of this epoch indicate a 
time of comparative peace. Toward the middle of the eighteenth 
century, the land was invaded by tribes from the mountains east of 
the Tigris. The Kassites, making themselves masters of the country, 
established a dynasty which governed for six hundred years. The 
thread of ancient Babylonian tradition, however, was not completely 
broken, for the mountaineers became assimilated to the older civili- 
zation. But under the Kassite sovereignty, the Empire lost its com- 
manding position; and in the West, its influence yielded to the con- 
quering march of Egypt under its Eighteenth Dynasty. For the 
moment, the glory of Babylon is in eclipse. When again the Empire 
emerges as a figure of the great drama, it is subordinate to Assyria. 
By that time, Israel is at home in Canaan. 

The dwellers in the Tigris-Euphrates valley, who thus achieved 
imperial dominion, were less a military than an agricultural and 
commercial people. The wars which the city-states waged among 
themselves and the foreign conquests of the Empire in its long 
history were undertaken, not as later by Assyria with cruel lust of 
agegrandizement, but. rather in the interests of trade. Kings gained 
their ambitious ends less by force than by diplomacy. Babylon’s 
weapon was her merchandise; and culture followed in her train. 
Her caravans, laden with the produce of richly fertile field and busy 
shop, trafficked with Mesopotamia and the Westland, and crossed 
by desert ways to Egypt; with the fine work of weavers and jewellers 
fared also precious lore. From the east, by land or sea, her traders 
brought back cotton and ivory from India; and the waters of great 
rivers bore her commerce throughout the length of the Empire. In 
the centuries of her splendor, Babylon was the world’s market- 
place and the radiant centre of learning. When the proud imperial 

78 


THE PROMISED LAND 


city bowed to more militant states, she imposed her erudite and 
sumptuous culture upon her conquerors. 

This civilization, in its beginnings older than history, attained 
extreme complexity. Society was divided into distinct classes, from 
the king, the nobles, and the priests, through the merchant middle 
class, to the artisans, the tenant farmers, the free laborers, and the 
slaves. The status of each class was defined, and its rights were 
safeguarded, by enactment. Women occupied a quite independent 
place, recognized in law; they could own and transfer property and 
engage in trade. Immense numbers of contract tablets attest the 
extent to which business and industry were developed, and the mi- 
nuteness with which the details of daily intercourse were regulated. 

In great artistic achievement the Babylonians were not the equals 
of the Egyptians. They lacked the materials for the colossal stone- 
work in building and sculpture that distinguished the art of Egypt. 
Their alluvial plain supplied only clay; the stone they used was 
transported from far distances. Forced mainly to employ brick, 
yet with this medium they created wonderful effects in their lofty 
staged towers, which served as shrines, and their magnificent 
temples and palaces. The Hebrew narrator conceived the Tower of 
Babel rightly: “They had brick for stone, and bitumen had they for 
mortar. And they said, Come, let us build us a city, and a tower 
whose top may reach unto heaven.” In the minor arts the people of 
the Euphrates yielded nothing to their contemporaries of the Nile. 
The outer walls of their great buildings were embellished with 
gloriously colored enamels of exquisite and imperishable texture. 
Skilled in the carving of ivory, the Babylonians were masters also of 
-the art of gem-cutting, in the production of personal ornaments and 
especially of seals, whose use was universal. The Eastern Empire 
was famous throughout the world for its textiles, notably of wool; 

79 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


among the spoils of Jericho, pillaged by the Israelites, was a “goodly 
Babylonish mantle.’”’ The craft of the weaver was enriched by the 
art of the embroiderer in the fashioning of a thing of price. Equally, 
the goldsmith, the joiner, and the worker in leather were celebrated 
for the finished beauty of their handiwork. Remains of Babylonian 
craftsmanship that have outlasted the ravage of war and time bear 
witness to the luxury exacted by this consummate civilization. 

The art of writing had been early won in the Euphrates valley; 
and documents have been unearthed which carry the records far 
back into the fourth millennium. By the time of Hammurabi an 
immense literature had come to flower. A group of narratives, in 
essence nature-myths, dealing with the creation of the world, rose 
out of an antiquity beyond the trace of historical research; in the 
renascence of culture under Hammurabi, they were collected, recast, 
and combined into a consistent whole. In their final form, of about 
one thousand lines, they compose the “Creation Epic” which sup- 
plies remarkable parallels with the first chapter of Genesis. Of even 
greater significance for Babylonian culture is the epic of Gilgamesh, 
in twelve books; the account of the Deluge, given in the eleventh 
tablet, is the prototype of the Hebrew narrative of the Flood. The 
brief story of the goddess Ishtar’s descent into the underworld of the 
dead to restore the lost Tammuz, her brother and husband, is the 
Babylonian version of the myth of Venus and Adonis. Other myths 
and legends which have been recovered in part are the story of 
Adapa, the first man, who fails of immortality; and the legend of 
Sargon the Great, who like Moses is exposed as an infant in a basket 
of reeds on the river; rescued by a peasant, he is beloved of Ishtar, 
and finally becomes king. These epics show a high degree of narra- 
tive skill and an accomplished poetic form. Of equal literary quality 
are hymns to the gods and penitential psalms. Many of the psalms, 

80 


THE PROMISED LAND 


in beauty of imagery, in moral insight and religious fervor, are not 
unworthy to be compared with the Hebrew Psalter. 

In science and its practical application, the Babylonians were 
pioneers. They devised a numerical system on both the decimal and 
sexagesimal basis; they divided the circle into 360 degrees, with sub- 
division of 60 minutes. Their method of reckoning time furnished 
the pattern of the modern calendar. With a profound and exact 
knowledge of the stars, though turned to the practice of astrology, 
they laid a foundation for a true science of astronomy. Not only were 
the Babylonians the leaders and teachers of their contemporary 
world; modern civilization as well, by way of Greece and Rome, 
stands vastly in their debt. 

But the dominant concern of their existence was religion. Among 
the Sumerians, primitive animism had already given birth to gods. 
Each city had its chief patron deity, attended by groups of lesser 
divinities. When the Semitic nomads poured into the valley in suc- 
cessive waves, they brought with them their own tribal conceptions 
and usages. The influence of the established religion persisted, how- 
ever, for the newcomers did not destroy the older culture but trans- 
formed it. The attributes and functions of the various gods remained 
virtually the same, though they underwent amplification with un- 
folding time. But the names identified with these attributes were 
changed, according as one god or another, through the victory of his 
worshippers, asserted his preéminence. Thus for example, Ea of 
Eridu and Enlil of Nippur ceded their place and powers to Marduk 
of Babylon. 

In the development of Babylonian religion, two forces were active 
— on the one hand, the popular beliefs and superstitions, survivals 
of an earlier stage of culture, but none the less operative, and on the 
other hand, the official theological doctrines promulgated by the 

81 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


priests. Official religion glorified the supreme god, Marduk, and 
rendered appropriate homage to the lesser figures of the pantheon. 
Concurrently, the pure worship of the gods was alloyed with the 
practice of an elaborate ritual of magic. The favor of the gods, if 
haply it were won, might be thwarted by the malign activity of 
demons. These evil spirits were to be exorcised by incantations re- 
cited by the priests. A considerable part of Babylonian literature 
consists of incantation texts; and the whole religious praxis takes 
color from this lower order of beliefs. 

In its higher forms, Babylonian religion approached, without quite 
reaching, the conception of monotheism. The great gods, differ- 
entiated, as civilization matured, from the hosts of demons, origi- 
nally personified the forces of nature. As reflection deepened, they 
were endowed with a more and more distinctive character. The 
cities of the plain identified their gods with the sun and moon and 
stars, with storms and waters and reproductive powers. These 
divinities were worshipped at the several centres under different 
names; and each centre had its own pantheon. When the city of 
Babylon rose to sovereignty among the valley kindgoms, its chief 
god, Marduk, in the beginning a solar figure, became the supreme 
god, source of light and wisdom and justice. But not the only god; 
for by his side lesser deities continued to receive their due worship. 
But though the Babylonians failed to attain true monotheism, their 
religion served as the inspiration of ethical ideals. Babylonia pre- 
ceded Israel by a millennium. The religions of the two peoples were 
akin. The point of contact lay in Canaan. 


When Hammurabi was king in Babylon, Canaan was a small, far- 
outlying province of the Empire. Conditions of life in the little 
country, about 2000 B.c., are reflected in an Egyptian romance from 

82 


THE PROMISED LAND 


the period of the Twelfth Dynasty. Sinuhe, a nobleman at the court 
of the Pharaoh, so the story runs, believing his life to be in danger, 
flees from Egypt. Coming to the Wall of the Princes, which de- 
fended the Nile kingdom against the inroads of hostile bands, he suc- 
ceeds in eluding the guards posted there. Once across the frontier, he 
reaches the desert; and here he is befriended by the sheikh of a tribe 
of “‘sand-wanderers”’ whom he had known in Egypt. Passing from 
one tribe to another, he makes his way to the country east of the 
Dead Sea. After a stay of a year and a half, he is finally invited to 
the court of a king in the north of Canaan, who has heard from other 
Egyptian refugees resident with him of the exploits of Sinuhe. The 
story continues: 

The chief preferred me before his children, giving me his eldest 
daughter in marriage. ... It is an excellent land. Figs are there and 
grapes; wine is more plentiful than water; honey abounds in it; 
numerous are its olives and all the products of its trees; there are 
barley and wheat without end, and cattle of all kinds. . .. I had daily 
rations of bread and wine, day by day; cooked meat and roasted fowl, 
besides the mountain game which I took. .. . Much butter was made 
for me, and milk prepared in every kind of way. There I passed 
many years; and the children which were born to me became strong 
men, each ruling his own tribe. . . . I did kindness to all: I gave water 
to the thirsty, I set again upon his way the traveller who had been 
stopped on it, I chastised the brigand. ... When I went forth to war, 
all the countries toward which I set out trembled in their pastures by 
their wells. I seized their cattle, I took away their vassals and carried 
off their slaves, I slew the inhabitants with my sword and my bow. 


A kind of primal feudalism, therefore, gave to Canaan such organ- 
ization and security as the troubled country was able to achieve. 
The meeting-ground of nations, Canaan was but a territory divided 
against itself. In an Egyptian document deriving from the Middle 
Kingdom (2100-1700), it is written concerning the Canaanite bar- 

83 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


barian, “‘He conquers not, nor yet is he conquered.” A permanent 
union of its divers peoples, however expedient on occasion against 
enemies from without, was physically impossible, for its habitable 
regions were separated by the barriers of its mountain ranges. So 
Israel proved it by fateful experience. The land was strewn with 
cities, governed by prince or chieftain, each independent of the 
others; though all in common may have submitted to the suzerainty 
of Babylonia or Egypt. Set each upon a hill, the cities were strongly 
defended by walls and towers; the neighboring villages, home of the 
farmer folk, were “daughters” of the mother-city, to which they 
looked in time of raid by marauders or the assault of invading armies. 
From an early age, necessity had taught the Canaanites the art of 
fortress-building. So the Hebrews pressing in across the Jordan 
found before them “cities fenced with high walls, gates, and bars; 
besides the unwalled towns a great many.” Stout defences and in- 
stant readiness for war were the price of the fruits of industry and of 
uncertain peace. The local prince, nested in his citadel, commanded 
the swords of his nobles; smiths in bronze furnished him for war; 
jewellers working with gold, silver, ivory and alabaster, ministered 
to the luxury of his court; potters, weavers, and builders in clay and 
stone, supplied the needs of his people. Traders brought wealth to 
his city; and his peasantry gathered a varied harvest of grains, 
olives, figs and grapes. But constant turmoil made the zest of life. 
Rival princes, ambitious of greater power and wealth, coveted one 
another’s lands, and took them when they could, smiting the con- 
quered citizens to death. The desert launched its swift-moving 
bands of hungry tribes, who swept away with them the cattle and 
the harvests. Then there were always passing caravans to be 
plundered, which yielded precious wrought work from Babylonia 
and gold from Egypt. In turn the wealth of Canaan and the plenty 
84 


THE PROMISED LAND 


of its plains were the spoil of conquering mighty armies from the east 
and from the south. There was no king of the land, and “every man 
did what was right in his own eyes.”” Thus it was in Israel in the time 
of the Judges, and thus it had been for a thousand years. 

When the Semitic Empire of Babylonia, in the eighteenth century, 
fell before the incursions of the Kassite mountaineers from beyond 
the Tigris, its grasp of the Westland was loosened. Although the 
influence of its culture persisted in Canaan, the Eastern Empire ceded 
its political and commercial supremacy there to Egypt. With the 
expulsion of the Hyksos from the Nile valley, about 1580, the Eight- 
eenth Dynasty at Thebes rose to magnificence and dominion. The 
Shepherd Kings, retreating through Canaan to the Orontes river in 
the north, drew after them the pursuit of the victorious Egyptians. 
Thus the way was opened to successive Pharaohs of the new Dynasty 
to extend their conquests and reap vast spoils. After a series of raiding 
expeditions across Canaan as far as the Euphrates in the course of a 
century, it fell to the great Thutmose III to bring the country under 
the powerful suzerainty of Egypt. By fifteen campaigns in nineteen 
years, he broke utterly such resistance as the petty princes were able 
to marshal against the trained legions of the Empire. The cities, 
strongly fortified, more than once compelled the Pharaoh to lay siege. 
But their mutual jealousies and the difficult character of the country 
prevented effective union for defence against the invader. Thutmose’s 
conquest was complete. The rulers of the little city-states were 
appointed by the Pharaoh’s command, sons and brothers of the 
princes were taken to Egypt as hostages, garrisons of imperial troops 
were quartered in the cities, and as vassals all the petty kingdoms 
sent yearly tribute to Thebes. In their rivalries and feuds among 
themselves, the Pharaoh played off one prince against another to 
their further weakness and his own advantage. Though the cities 

85 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


maintained the show of independence, the land became politically a 
province of the Empire; and commercially it was a wholly Egyptian 
sphere of influence. 

The abounding plains and wealthy cities of Canaan invited plunder 
by an ambitious and luxurious state like Egypt under the Eighteenth 
Dynasty. The annals of Thutmose, recounting his triumphs, cele- 
brate repeatedly the extraordinary opulence of the country., During 
one campaign the soldiers every day caroused and anointed them- 
selves with oil as on feast days in Egypt. At the battle of Megiddo, the 
Egyptians routed their enemies, who fled to the defences of the city, 
leaving behind them their horses and their gold and silver chariots. 
Two of the native kings escaped altogether, for the Egyptian troops, 
instead of following up the pursuit, turned greedily to the spoil. The 
fugitives from the battle-field found safety within the city walls. 
“While they were being drawn up by their clothes from without into 
this town,” recites the chiselled chronicle, “oh that the warriors of 
the King had not yielded to their desire to plunder the goods of the 
enemy!’’ After the final capitulation of Megiddo, the chiefs of the 
land came to the Pharaoh with “tribute of silver, of gold, of lapis 
lazuli and malachite, bringing grain, wine, oil, and flocks for the 
army of his Majesty; and they sent the foreign workmen who were 
among them with the tribute southwards. His Majesty appointed 
chiefs anew.” 

The spoils ravished by Thutmose’s armies in Canaan and the north 
were of incredible quantity and amazing variety. The jubilant 
enthusiasm of the royal scribe conjures visions of fabulous wealth and 
unimaginable splendor. ‘‘There were found wines abundant in their 
wine-presses, as water flows down; their grain was on the threshing- 
floors more abundant than the sand on the shore.” Besides the 
natural products of the land, honey, oil, incense, fruits, and choice 

86 


THE PROMISED LAND 


woods, “more abundant than anything known to the soldiers of his 
Majesty, without exaggeration,” there were precious stones, lapis 
lazuli, malachite, and alabaster, and all metals. Cattle and flocks 
were in similar measure; the spoils of Megiddo alone included 2041 
mares, 191 fillies, 1929 bulls, 2000 small goats, 20,500 sheep. “One 
does not reckon the wild fowl of that country.’’ Of booty and tribute 
in the wrought work of the craftsman there was a corresponding 
treasure. In the lists of Thutmose are mentioned chariots plated or 
inlaid with gold, silver, and colors; suits of bronze armor inlaid with 
gold; beautifully fashioned dishes of gold, silver, bronze, and copper; 
caldrons, great jars, and vases for drinking; gold and silver rings; a 
silver statue, the head of gold; large tables of ivory and kharub wood, 
_ inlaid with gold and all precious stones; chairs and footstools of 
similar opulent workmanship; tent poles splendidly decorated; 
spears, shields, and bows; personal ornaments in rare metals, set with 
gems. The luxury of the nobles of Samaria which the Israelite 
prophets denounced scornfully was not new in Canaan. The wealth 
of the land may be measured by the scale of the Pharaoh’s operations. 
The Egyptian army numbered probably not more than fifteen, or 
at most twenty, thousand. In eleven campaigns were taken 7548 
captives and slaves; about four hundred were nobles. The lists of 
Thutmose name one hundred nineteen cities and towns in the 
conquered territory. Since much of the country is mountainous and 
barren, the number and the wealth of cities in Syria and Canaan 
indicate the intensive character of Canaanite civilization. 
Intercourse between Egypt and the Coastland, however, was not 
limited to military conquest. Trade overland and by sea was constant 
and varied, enriching life in both countries. Phoenician ships and 
merchant caravans brought to markets on the Nile “slaves destined 
for the workshop or the harem, Hittite bulls and stallions, horses 
87 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


from Singar, oxen from Alasia, rare and curious animals such as 
elephants from Nii, and brown bears from the Lebanon, smoked and 
salted fish, live birds of many-colored plumage, goldsmiths’ work and 
precious stones, wood for building or for ornamental work — pine, 
cypress, yew, cedar, and oak, musical instruments, helmets, leathern 
jerkins covered with metal scales, weapons of bronze and iron, 
chariots, dyed and embroidered stuffs, perfumes, dried cakes, oil, 
wines, liqueurs, and beer.” ! The result of the close contact between 
the two countries was a rapid and profound change in Egyptian ways. 
At this period Canaan was not inferior to Egypt in the arts of life. 
The little land of city-states, giving more than it received, imposed 
something of its culture and racial character upon the Empire. In 
reciprocal influence, the accomplishment and pattern of Canaan for 
the moment were the stronger. | 

During the reigns of the next two Pharaohs, conditions in Canaan 
remained as Thutmose III had established them. An occasional 
raid or punitive expedition, bringing more spoils to Egypt, served 
also to secure the tribute due the Empire and to hold the vassal 
princes to their allegiance. Amenhotep III, who followed now upon 
the throne, was able to administer the home affairs of his mighty 
state and to enrich the land with grandiose monuments, undisturbed 
by rebellions in the Northland. His reign and that of his son, Amen- 
hotep IV, in their relations to Canaan and the eastern world, are 
brought into sharp actuality by the correspondence inscribed on clay 
tablets discovered at Tell-el-Amarna. 

The story of Sinuhe, delightful romance in the ancient manner, 
illumines with the vividness of things seen the troubled darkness of 
uttermost years. The Amarna letters, more than five centuries later, 
authentic contemporary documents of their period, have all the 


1 Maspero: The Struggle of the Nations, p. 284. 
88 


THE PROMISED LAND 


fascination of romance. Even the circumstances of their discovery 
quicken imagination and emotion, blending a stroke of sudden good 
fortune with the tragic regret of an irreparable loss. An Egyptian 
peasant-woman, fumbling in the dust of the ruined capital of the 
heretic King Ikhnaton — Amenhotep IV — chanced upon some 
tablets of baked clay, impressed upon both sides with outlandish 
characters. The find led to renewed search by peasants, who knew 
that old things dug from the soil of Egypt bring a price. The tablets 
thus unearthed passed from hand to hand, suffering grievous breakage 
in transmission, some in sacks being ground to powder, before their 
significance was recognized. Altogether about three hundred fifty 
tablets and fragments were recovered. ‘They proved to be for the 
most part a collection of letters sent to Egypt during the reigns of 
Amenhotep IIT and Amenhotep IV (1411-1358), and deposited in the 
royal archives of the new capital Akhetaton, the modern Tell-el- 
Amarna. 

The tablets open vistas of a wide and busy world. Kings of Baby- 
lonia, of Assyria, of Mitanni (northern Mesopotamia), of Alasia 
(Cyprus or the mainland opposite), and of the Hittite land write to 
their “Brother” of Egypt. In turn several letters, original or in copy, 
retained in the archives, were from the Pharaoh himself. Vassal 
princes of Amurru (Syria) and Canaan communicate with their great 
overlord in terms of ostentatious utter servility. Some of the letters 
of the subject chieftains are addressed to Egyptian officers at the 
court or stationed in the province. Others were exchanged among the 
princes themselves. A few letters are from women. It is probable 
that communication between nations, of which the Amarna tablets 
are a salient instance, was not limited to this period. Letters from the 
kings refer to relations with Egypt which had existed in the time of 
their fathers and before; and presumably intercourse continued after 

89 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the death of Amenhotep IV. For the countries of this eager stirring 
world were closely linked by ties of self-interest and mutual ad- 
vantage. Official scribes were maintained at court, versed in all the 
technique of diplomatic correspondence; and couriers passed to and 
fro with such regularity as occasion demanded and dangers of the 
road allowed. The highway of this intercourse lay through Canaan. 

The entire correspondence, with one or two exceptions, is written 
in the Babylonian language, employing the cuneiform script. In cer- 
tain of the letters, Babylonian words are explained by glosses in 
Canaanite forms, or again by an Egyptian equivalent. Among the 
tablets also are practice exercises which served to aid the scribe in 
learning this international language of diplomacy and trade. For 
models, the scribe had before him on cuneiform tablets, versions 
of Babylonian myths. The language of Mitanni and that of the 
Hittites, as well as of Egypt, were non-Semitic; the speech of Syria 
and Canaan, though cognate with the Babylonian, was yet different 
from it. That all the nations in common, for purposes of intercourse 
with one another, and the princes of Canaan among themselves, used 
the Babylonian language, which was foreign to themselves, witnesses 
to the spread and power of Babylon’s influence, though political 
dominance in world affairs at that epoch rested with Egypt. 

The letters from independent kings disclose intimate glimpses of 
life as it was in those old splendor-loving days. Some are concerned 
with intermarriages between the royal and the imperial houses. It 
was not unusual for the Pharaoh to take foreign princesses to wife. 
Amenhotep III had married the sister of the king of Babylonia; and 
he writes now asking for the hand of his daughter. In reply to a re- 
quest from his Brother of Babylon for an Egyptian princess, the 
Pharaoh says haughtily, but not truly, “The daughter of the King of 
the land of Egypt has never been given to anybody.” Whereupon 

90 


THE PROMISED LAND 


the Babylonian monarch, duly humbled, asks for some one of the 
beautiful women of Egypt, remarking deliciously, ‘Who here shall 
say she is not a daughter of the King!” In all these letters from 
foreign potentates there is much discussion back and forth regarding 
*sifts,”’ which in less royal terms would seem to have been exchange 
and barter. In return for wives and slaves and native products and 
handiwork, the kings ask the Pharaoh for gold. One is building a 
temple, and another a palace; and they need gold to complete the 
work. Often there is complaint about the amount and the quality of 
the gold sent from Egypt. One gift — when melted in the furnace! 
— proved to be scandalously underweight; and the injured king begs 
that the Pharaoh personally shall supervise the sealing of the packet, 
instead of entrusting it to an official whose honesty may fairly be 
questioned. The king of Mitanni protests through several letters, as 
though chanting a refrain, that the images of gold promised by the 
Pharaoh turned out on arrival to have been made of wood. Though 
the Pharaoh and his distant correspondents were not always in agree- 
ment, however, the amenities of their royal relationships were not 
neglected. Messages of congratulation or condolence passed be- 
tween them, appropriate to the occasion. When Amenhotep III 
was sick unto death, the king of Mitanni sent him a statue of his 
goddess Ishtar of Nineveh, in the hope that she might bring healing 
to the aged Pharaoh, a hope that was not realized. The king of 
Alasia, writing that the hand of Nergal is upon his land, afflicting it 


‘ 


with pestilence, asks that an “eagle-sorcerer’’ may be sent from 
Egypt. To find a home in Cyprus, Nergal, the Babylonian god of the 
dead, had travelled far. 

Intercourse between Egypt and distant nations, as may be 
fancied, was attended with risks and difficulties. Once a princess 
sent to the Pharaoh was accompanied by an escort of three thousand 


ot 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


men. The king of Babylonia, to excuse the smallness of his present of 
four minas of lapis lazuli and five spans of horses, urges justly that 
the road is dangerous, the water scarce, and the heat great. Often 
caravans were set upon by marauding tribes of the desert or by 
robber chieftains of Syria: one king, whose caravans had been thus 
plundered, insists that the Pharaoh shall indemnify him for the loss, 
since the outrage occurred in territory subject to Egypt. But despite 
all difficulties of intercourse, the crafty Oriental monarchs, with 
watchful and jealous eye, kept themselves informed of the doings of 
rival petitioners for the favor of the mighty lord of the West. The 
king of Babylonia complains to the Pharaoh: ‘‘ Now Assyrians, who 
are my vassals, I have not sent to thee, as they themselves have re- 
ported. Wherefore are they come to thy land ? If thou lovest me, let 
them not have dealings with thee. With empty hands let them return 
hither.’’ Across distance and perils thus diplomacy spun its intricate 
web, when the Hebrews were still nomad shepherds. 

The letters of the princes of Syria and Canaan tell a different 
story. As vassals to their overlord, the chieftains write to the 
Pharaoh, protesting their own loyalty and accusing their enemies of 
rebellion against Egypt and wanton aggression against themselves. 
Since the conquest of the Northland by Thutmose III, a century 
earlier, the cities of the province had remained tributary to the Em- 
pire under military compulsion. Amenhotep IV, mystic and prophet 
of a new religion, was engaged at home in a bitter conflict with the 
established priesthood of the ancient traditional Amon-worship. Ap- 
parently he made no effort, even had he been inclined, to maintain 
control over the rampant chieftains of his northern province. The 
cities of the coast and of the plains would willingly have continued 
their allegiance to the Pharaoh, in the interests of their trade and for 
the security provided them by Egyptian garrisons. The status of 

92 


THE PROMISED LAND 


the loyal cities is illustrated in a letter from the ruler of Katna to 
Amenhotep III. “Since my fathers were numbered among thy 
servants, is this land thy land, is Katna thy city, and I belong to my 
lord. O, my lord, when the warriors and the chariots of my lord 
came, food, strong drink, cattle, honey, and oil were brought before 
the warriors and chariots of my lord.” The rulers of the hill towns, 
on the contrary, freer by nature, had less to lose and more to gain by 
a return to the old anarchy which afforded license to plunder and al- 
lowed opportunity for the strong to wrest new territory from richer 
but less warlike cities. In the general uproar they were quick to avail 
themselves of support from beyond their own borders. Already in the 
reign of Amenhotep ITI, the king of far-off Babylon had been sounded 
by certain Canaanite princes who hoped, though in vain, to enlist his 
aid in an uprising against Egypt. So, seven centuries later, Israel and 
Judah intrigued in their world. The king of Mitanni seems to have 
mixed in the turmoil. The Hittites in force were pressing down from 
the north; and with these militant adventurers the rebel native chief- 
tains allied themselves for predatory war. Bands from the desert, the 
Sa-Gaz and the Khabiru, ranged the country, plundering on their 
own account or entering the paid service of the princes. Thus were 
the Hebrews breaking in upon Canaan. Meanwhile the Pharaoh was 
building a new capital city and inditing hymns to his god Aton. 
Some seventy or eighty vassal princes despatched tablets to the 
Egyptian court. The outstanding figures of the revolt in Syria are 
Rib-addi, loyal governor of Gubla (Byblos), and the rebel chieftain 
Abd-ashirta and his son Aziru, lords of Amurru. The letters of Rib- 
addi, fifty-four to the Pharaoh, six to Amanappa, Egyptian general, 
and four to other officials, are typical of the Amarna correspondence 
as a whole. Out of the trepidation of immediate events, he writes 
with a passionate directness that recreates the crowded troublous 
93 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


scene. Formerly, he says, “at the sight of a man from Egypt, the 
kings of Canaan fled before him; but behold, the sons of Abd-ashirta 
fright away the people from Egypt, and with bloody weapons have 
they threatened me.” His city is besieged by ships; for Aziru, having 
conquered other cities of the coast, impressed their ships into his own 
service and turned them against Gubla. The Shirdani, Egyptian 
auxiliaries (from Sardinia or Sardis in Lydia?), have been killed by 
the Suti, robber bands in the pay of his enemies. The Hittites too 
are ravaging the land. Again and again he appeals to the Pharaoh 
to send troops, fifty pairs of horses and two hundred foot-soldiers, or 
another time, four hundred troops and thirty pairs of horses; he begs 
for grain and for ships. But no help comes. His foes are more power- 
ful than he, and his plight is desperate. 

My fields are like a woman without a husband, for lack of sowing. 
All my cities in the mountains and on the plains of the sea-coast have 
gone over to the Sa-Gaz. Only Gubla, with two other cities, remains 
to me. ... Like a bird caught in a snare, soam I in Gubla. What shall 
I do in my isolation? Lo, I think on it day and night....I have 
written to the Court, and thou hast sent no answer.... Nine times 
have I been wounded, and I fear for my life. ... The people of Gubla 
and my house and my wife said to me, Go hence to the son of Abd- 
ashirta, and let us make peace between us. But I heeded them not. 
... 1 am old, and my body is racked with pain. 


Then the letters cease. Rib-addi was but one among many rulers of 
cities, though his letters happen to be the most numerous. The 
faithful vassals, relying vainly on the armed support of the Empire, 
were swept into the power of the rebellious chieftains. In the press 
of hostile peoples crowding into the land and amid the feuds of 
native princes, each city or group maintained itself according to the 
measure of its force. 


In Canaan raged a similar tumult. Though the country, lying 
94 


THE PROMISED LAND 


nearer to Egypt, was held in somewhat firmer control than Syria, 
yet the letters from the local princes utter the same vehement 
protestations of fidelity to the great King, mingled with the call for 
help against rival chiefs and the invading Khabiru. The ruler of 
Kelte (Keilah) complains that thirty cities are leagued against him. 
The uprising was general, complicated further by the inroads of 
desert bands. Among the cities afterwards significant in Israelite 
history which sent tablets to the Pharaoh were Aijalon, Lachish, 
Gezer, Megiddo, Ashkelon, Gaza, and Jerusalem. The important 
city of Shechem is mentioned once, but no letter seems to have come 
from this place famous in Israel. Were the Hebrews, as the story of 
Simeon and Levi might imply, already in possession? 

The Canaanite ruler who suffered most from the forays of the 
Khabiru was Abd-khiba, the King’s officer in Jerusalem. Like Rib- 
addi in the north, he sought to maintain the imperial authority 
against great odds. Though his enemies slandered him before the 
King, his loyalty ought not to be questioned. “Lo, I am not a 
{native but now vassal] prince; an officer [or deputy] am I of the 
King, my lord. Behold, not my father nor my mother hath set me in 
this place. The powerful hand of the King hath established me in 
the house of my father.”” Duly he pays tribute, and he sends gifts to 
the Pharaoh. But his foes are become mighty against him; all the 
princes have rebelled against Egypt, and the Khabiru are ravaging 
all the lands of the King. In several letters he adds a postscript ad- 
dressed to the imperial scribe, bespeaking his gracious attention that 
he bring the purport of the letter to the particular notice of the King, 
his lord. Perhaps the evil case of his city was not so utterly hopeless 
as he sought to paint it, for Jerusalem was the last of the fortified 
cities of Canaan to fall before the slow, hard-fought conquest of the 
land by Israel. Once, with a note of special emphasis in his appeal, 

95 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Abd-khiba exclaims, “Behold, the King hath set his name upon 
Jerusalem for ever!” —a prophecy which events were signally to 
annul. Anciently in Canaan, strife was every man’s portion, and 
quick vicissitudes made the history of the land. 

In the colored, turbulent world revealed in its length and breadth 
by the Amarna letters, Israel a few centuries later played an active 
but never dominant part. 

The Amarna correspondence preceded the earliest literature of 
Israel by several hundred years. Yet the style of these letters from 
kindred peoples, writing a cognate language, is significant in its 
affinity with the Hebrew genius. Israel had not wholly to create the 
medium in which it worked supremely. The newcomers from the 
desert, possessing themselves of Canaan by gradual occupation, 
entered into a ripe civilization won by an elder people of their own 
stock. The culture to which Israel thus fell heir finds an expression 
in the few precious documents of a period which accident has restored 
in its immediate actuality. The Amarna letters are instinct with the 
spirit of their age and race. 

The potentates of the ancient East were masters of elaborate 
courtesy and ceremonious phrase. With the proud deference and 
circumstantial greeting that one king renders to a brother monarch 
on occasions of state, the Pharaoh writes to the king of Babylon: 


To Kadashman-kharbe, King of Karaduniash, 

my brother, thus speaks Nibmuaria, the great King, 

King of Egypt, thy brother: With me it is well 

With thee may it be well! With thy house, thy wives, 

Thy children, thy nobles, thy horses, 

Thy chariots, in the midst of thy lands may it in high degree be well! 

With me it is well, with my house, my wives, my children, 

my nobles, my horses, my chariots, 

the warriors in hosts, it is well, and in the midst of my lands it is in 
high degree well. 


96 


THE PROMISED LAND 


Whereupon the Pharaoh proceeds with all directness to the business 
in hand. The plenitude of repetitious phrase would seem to indicate 
that the mechanical technique of writing offered no difficulties. As 
befits one of humbler station addressing his lord, a vassal prince 
writes to the Pharaoh thus: 


To the King, my lord, my gods, 
my sun, the sun of 

Heaven, thus spoke Yapakhi, 

the man of Gazri, 

thy servant, the dust of thy feet, 
the servant of thy horses: 

At the two feet of the King, my lord, 
my gods, my sun, the sun 

of Heaven, I fell down seven times 
and seven times indeed 

with belly and back. 

I have heard the words 

of the messenger of the King, 

my lord, verily, verily. 


Though this formula of address was the conventional mode of greet- 
ing, employed — with individual variations — in most of the letters 
from the vassal princes, its rhetorical flourish is not without a kind 
of eloquence. Sometimes the writer, carried beyond the routine 
phrase and matter of fact by the earnestness of his feeling, rises to a 
strain of poetry: “Whether we ascend into Heaven, or go down into 
earth, our head is in thy hands.” Similarly, another anticipates the 
figurative imagination of the Hebrew scriptures: 


Behold, I am thy servant, true to the King, my lord. I look on one 
side, and I look on the other side, and there is no light; but I look on 
the King, my lord, and there is light. A brick may be taken out of its 
place, but I shall not move from under the feet of my lord. ... The 
yoke of my lord is on my neck, and I bear it. 


a7 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


A still higher flight essays Abimilki of Tyre. Addressing the Pharaoh 
Ikhnaton, who at the cost of empire was establishing in his new cap- 
ital the sole worship of the sun’s disc, the writer pays the great King 
a subtilely calculated homage by his adroit play with imagery of the 
sun. 


I am the dust from under the sandals of the King, my lord. My 
lord is the sun, who riseth over the lands day by day, according to the 
will of the sun, his gracious father. He it is who giveth life, and re- 
turneth after his vanishing, who bringeth the whole land to rest by 
the might of his hand, who thundereth in the heavens like Adad, so 
that the whole earth trembleth at his thundering. ... On my breast, 
on my back, I bear the word of the King, my lord. Whoso hearkeneth 
to the King, his lord, and serveth him in his place, upon him the sun 
riseth, and there cometh good from the mouth of his lord. But if he 
heareth not the word of the King, his lord, then falleth his city, falleth 
his house; his name is not in the whole land forever. Behold the 
servant who hearkeneth to his lord! Well is it with his city, well with 
his house; his name endureth eternally. Thou art the sun, which 
riseth upon me, and a wall of bronze established for me. 

It was centuries yet before the literature of Israel came to flower, 
but these passages are not foreign to Hebrew style in its splendid 
‘maturity. Three hundred years after the Amarna period, invading 
Israel fought against the kings of Canaan and overcame Sisera. The 
swelling periods and conscious imagery of the earlier princes’ letters 
contrast strangely with Deborah’s wild song of battle and fierce 


triumph. 


Canaan, lost to Egypt by Amenhotep IV and his feeble successors 
of the Eighteenth Dynasty, among whom was Tut-ankh-amen, was 
recovered in part by the Pharaohs of the Nineteenth Dynasty. The 
withdrawal of Egyptian power from the province had left the way 
open to the aggressive Hittites, who established themselves in the 

98 


THE PROMISED LAND 


north by alliance with the Amorite cities, and even penetrated to 
southern Canaan. Indeed, remembrance of them survived in the 
traditions of Israel. After sixteen years of varying conflict on Syrian 
ground with these formidable enemies, Ramses IT, fourth Pharaoh of 
the Nineteenth Dynasty, and the Hittite king, in 1271, made a 
treaty, incised on a silver tablet in the Babylonian language and 
script, defining their reciprocal obligations. But Egypt had yet to 
contend with the Hittites for nearly a hundred years. Meanwhile 
the march and countermarch of hostile armies across Canaan al- 
lowed the long-troubled land no peace. The cities, unable to main- 
tain themselves independently, accepted the control of Egypt or of 
the Hittites as advantage seemed to offer, but ever ready for a turn of 
fortune or new war. Commercial intercourse and exchange of cul- 
ture, however, between Egypt and the Northland continued as of old. 
Out of the general ceaseless unrest of Canaan, many of the more en- 
terprising or less warlike spirits had for generations sought oppor- 
tunity or quiet in Egypt; and there some rose to position in the 
state. Such a one was Joseph, in the proud traditions of Israel; and 
like the ancestral Hebrews, wandering tribes in a time of famine in 
Canaan pushed on to the Delta, and were permitted there to graze 
their flocks within the border of the Empire. 

In the reign of Merneptah, successor of Ramses IT, Canaan again 
broke into revolt, and again was compelled to acknowledge the 
authority of Egypt. Constantly too, as the annals of the Nineteenth 
Dynasty attest, bands of marauders from the desert were loosed 
upon the coastland in numbers ever renewed. As in the Amarna 
period the Sa-Gaz and the Khabiru secured a footing in Canaan, so 
now a century and a half later, Hebrew tribes seem to have es- 
tablished themselves in definitive occupation. But Canaan and 
Syria had yet to suffer another great invasion. The island peoples of 

99 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the Western Sea, always venturesome in their ships, were beginning 
to move in force against the mainland to the east and south. Bring- 
ing with them their wives and children and all their goods, they 
aimed to possess themselves permanently of the rich territories of 
the coast. An inscription of Ramses III narrates: 

The Isles were restless, disturbed among themselves at one and the 
same time. No land stood before them, beginning from Kheta 
(Hittite land), Kedi (Cilicia), Carchemish, Arvad, and Alasia. They 
destroyed [them and assembled in their] camp in one place in the 
midst of Amor (Amurru). They desolated its people and its land like 
that which is not. They came with fire prepared before them, forward 
towards Egypt. Their main strength was [composed of] Pulesti, 
Tjakaray, Shalalsha, Daanau, and Uashasha. These lands were 
united, and they laid their hands upon the land as far as the Circle of 
the Earth. 


The invaders overcame the Hittites, and advancing into Canaan, 
they threatened Egypt. Ramses III, with a war fleet and an army, 
defeated them in a great battle. Though turned back from Egypt, 
they were not utterly routed. Among them, the Pulesti effected a 
settlement on the shore of Canaan. There gradually reénforced by 
later arrivals of their kinsmen, they founded the confederacy of 
cities which Israel came to know as the kingdom of the Philistines. 
After some centuries of militant independence, a check to the 
growth of Israelite power, they virtually disappeared. The country 
which they occupied but could not wholly conquer keeps their 
memory alive in its name, Palestine. At the moment these invad- 
ers from the sea were striking at the coast, the tribes of Israel, deliv- 
ered out of Egypt, were pressing in from the south and east on 
Canaan. 


The millennial perplexed history of Canaan is reflected in the 
100 


THE PROMISED LAND 


quality and the character of its civilization. The culture of this land 
of checkered fortunes, though mature and elaborate, bore no single 
distinctive impress. It was the blended result of multifarious in- 
fluences from without, from Babylonia, from Egypt, doubtless in 
some measure from the Hittites, also from the Mycenean-Aigean 
world by way of Phoenicia, and later when Israel was entering the 
land, by the mediation of the Philistines. Canaan absorbed with an 
immense power of assimilation. It could not create. No great 
national art like that of the two mighty Empires was possible to this 
little country of many peoples. The geographical and _ political 
conditions which prevented the fusion of its mixed population into 
one powerful state worked equally against the concentration of pur- 
pose and continuity of tradition whereby each new generation builds 
upon the achievements of its predecessors. Mutually hostile cities 
lacked the shaping, unifying force of a strong central government 
which might guide collective effort toward great ideal ends. The 
wealth of the country, deriving from the fertility of its soil and the 
gains of trade, contributed to the adornment of life sumptuously. 
But its civilization was materialistic; and its borrowed culture was 
turned to the service of practical aims. 

Utensils of the most elementary form sufficed for the peasantry. 
Wealth centred in the cities, whose population comprised land- 
owners, warriors, traders, and craftsmen. The Canaanites were 
skilled in the building of fortress-walls and towers. For the rest, the 
city was allowed to happen. Within the cramped area enclosed by 
the massive wall, dwellings of mud or sun-dried brick were crowded 
together quite at individual caprice. Whatever ground was not thus 
taken made the streets. When a house collapsed from age or fire or 
the destruction of war, another was built upon the wreckage, making 
a new level, and set perhaps at a different angle. Of architecture in 

101 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the great sense there was nothing. The centre of activity, at once 
market and law-court, was the broad gate of the city wall. The 
sanctuary was a hillside, the “high place,” fitted forth with rough- 
hewn standing stones and altars of earth or rock under the open sky. 
Sculpture likewise attained no development. Small images, in im- 
mense numbers, of gods and animals, in clay, stone, and bronze, 
though expressive of their intention, were crude in form and work- 
manship. The palaces, temples, and public edifices of Babylonia and 
Egypt, with their prodigious sculptures and magnificent decorations, 
were beyond the power of the Canaanite cities, as they were beyond 
their needs. 

Rather it was in the lesser arts of use and embellishment that 
Canaan excelled. In this country crossed by the caravans of the 
nations, abounded articles of foreign handiwork, to which the native 
craftsman looked for his models. Imported wares the Canaanite 
potters imitated with success. Gold, silver, ivory and precious 
stones furnished the jeweller with material for cunningly wrought 
things of adornment. Tools and weapons were fashioned of flint and 
bronze; the use of iron entered the country with the coming of the 
Philistines. What the Canaanites were able to achieve in weaving 
and the working of metals and wood has endured in representations 
on Egyptian monuments and descriptions contained in Egyptian 
records. These memorials attest that in the great period of civiliza- 
tion in Canaan, during its relations with the Eighteenth Dynasty, 
the productions of its native workers, though derived from foreign 
examples, were not inferior to those of contemporary Egypt in rich- 
ness and skill. 

Writing was extensively practised in Canaan as early as the 
fifteenth century. The Amarna correspondence, supplemented by 
similar tablets unearthed in old Canaanite cities, indicates the ease 

102 


THE PROMISED LAND 


and frequency with which letters were exchanged. Though the art 
was doubtless the secret of professional scribes, chiefly in the service 
of kings and officials, yet by recourse to the scribe the use of writing 
was available to all the people. One city, known still to the Israelites 
by its ancient name of “‘ City of Books”’ or “of the Scribe,” may have 
been thus designated as a depository of archives. The script of the 
Amarna period was the Babylonian cuneiform. Originating in the 
Euphrates valley, it was adapted to the material its inventors had at 
hand, soft clay moulded into tablets which received the impress of 
the wedge-shaped writing instrument and were then hardened in the 
sun or in fire. The introduction of papyrus from Egypt into Pheeni- 
cia in the twelfth century made possible the employment of a cursive 
script, in which individual letters replaced the syllabic units of the 
earlier cuneiform. This alphabetic script — whether it was invented 
by the Phoenicians and was carried in their trading ships across the 
Mediterranean, or whether on the contrary they derived it from the 
western islands or from Egypt — became the medium of writing of 
the Canaanite language, the speech which the Israelites adopted 
when they settled in the country. But though the art of writing was 
early at their disposal and in widespread use, the peoples of Canaan, 
always dependent on greater, more favored nations, developed no 
native literature. This achievement was reserved for later posses- 
sors of the land. 

The level of culture attained by a people is defined ultimately 
by its religion. Babylonia and Egypt, in the service of their great 
national religions, produced an amazingly copious and contempla- 
tive literature. But no similar texts exist to illustrate the beliefs and 
usages of Canaan. Except for fragmentary references in the Amarna 
letters and in Egyptian records, its gods survive only in the little 
images recovered from the soil, and in Canaanite proper names com- 

103 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


pounded with the names of deities. The manner of their worship 
must be inferred from the remains of cultus objects and from allu- 
sions to it contained in the Hebrew scriptures. No legends embody- 
ing their myths, no hymns to the gods, no codes of ritual laws il- 
lumine the profounder realities of life as the Canaanites conceived or 
felt them. 

Of an impressionable, imaginative race, the Canaanites became 
deeply rooted in the soil. And their religion, like their civilization, 
was materialistic and practical. Its chief gods were the deities repre- 
senting the productive forces of nature. Every community or local- 
ity had its Baal, the “‘owner”’ of the land, the bestower of bounty, 
each baal distinguished from all others by the sphere of his individ- 
ual proprietorship. Companion to him was the Baalath, goddess of 
generation. Worship was rendered to the baal in a spirit of grateful 
abandon. At the high place was offered sacrifice of animals and the 
produce of the fields with orgiastic rites. Deities distinguished by 
proper names were the sun, Shamash — whence sun-myths known 
to Israel, like the story of Samson — the moon, Sin, and the god 
of storms, Ramman-Adad; and foreign gods besides. No formal 
religious system was accepted by the country as a whole: the several 
deities were not elevated to rank in an organized pantheon; and 
there was no single “Lord of the gods.”’ On its own plane of nature- 
worship, with a very large admixture of credulity, of fear of demons 
and belief in the magical efficacy of charms, the religion of the 
Canaanites, essentially a religion of the people, was of such vitality 
that it worked powerfully upon Israel. But it never purified itself 
of the grosser elements. Influenced by the lore of Babylonia and 
Egypt, yet it was in no sense comparable to their deeply reasoned, 
idealizing religions. It reached no conception of moral values; and it 
wholly failed of spirituality. 

104 


THE PROMISED LAND 


Israel fell upon Canaan from the desert, advancing in the name of 
Yahweh, its one and militant God. Wrought to single sharpness of 
edge by the hard discipline of solitude in the wastes, the Hebrews in 
the simple strength of youth were launched upon a crowded mature 
luxurious world. In culture and the practical arts they had every- 
thing to learn. Inevitably they submitted to the softening influences 
of the new way of life. Their range of interests widened by the con- 
tact, the content of their experience was largened and enriched. In 
the process of fusion the Hebrew temper gained flexibility. But it 
kept its primal intensity of mettle; and with time the Hebrews made 
the Canaanite civilization their own, stamping it with their distinc- 
tive character. The change was gradual, the issue long uncertain. 
Finally, diversified but indefeasible, the genius of Israel triumphed. 


VI 
DAYBREAK 


WANDERERS by primal habitude, the Hebrew tribes encamped at 
Kadesh were again in movement. In the wilderness south of Canaan, 
where they had sojourned after their escape from bondage in 
Egypt, great things had happened. By the mediation of their leader 
Moses, they received a revelation of Yahweh, whom they accepted as 
their sole God. United in a common worship, they won also a closer 
tribal organization, which strengthened them for war. Confident 
of their God and a new power in themselves, they felt once more the 
ancestral urge; and their children now grown to manhood, increase of 
numbers crowded them from their oasis. In the name of Yahweh, 
they set forth. 

The wealth and fertility of Canaan beckoned. Before the tribes 
essayed to penetrate the alluring but formidable region to the north, 
Moses, so the narrative runs, sent forward scouts to spy out the 
country and bring back report of it, whether the land is fat or lean, 
whether the people there are few or many, strong or weak, and 
whether they dwell in camps or in strong holds. The spies returned 
with news of diverse import. It is aland flowing with milk and honey. 
As a token of its fertility, they fetch with them a branch with one 
cluster of grapes so huge that it is borne on a staff between two men; 
grapes therefore grow in abundance, and likewise pomegranates and 
figs. But the cities are fortified and very large. Moreover, the sons 
of giants dwell in the land, so that the spies were as grasshoppers by 
comparison. At this report the tribes lost heart, and proposed that 
they return to Egypt. Then Caleb stilled the people before Moses, 

106 


DAYBREAK 


and persuaded them against their will to attack. In the battle that 
followed, the Israelites were defeated. But the clan of Caleb suc- 
ceeded ultimately in conquering territory for itself about Hebron. 

These picturesque details render vividly the impression that the 
ancient strong cities and rich fields of Canaan made upon nomads 
breaking in rudely armed from the meagreness of waste spaces. His- 
torically, the episode of the spies’ mission was but a single instance 
of an extended process; for probably the invaders were able to effect 
a permanent settlement only after divers tentatives. Underlying 
the tradition here is the fact that the several tribes which afterwards 
constituted the nation entered the land by different courses. Caleb, 
of the tribe of the Kenizzites, was originally at home in the desert 
region of Edom; later in Canaan, the clan fused with Judah, which 
also came up from the south. The tribes that had gathered at Ka- 
desh were merely the nucleus of the subsequent people of Israel. 
This partial group, fashioned anew by its acceptance of the God of 
Sinai, was the bearer of the vital principle which ultimately drew to- 
gether kindred tribes, yet of differing experiences, into the nation. 
But the time was long and the ways various that brought them all 
into the gradual, hard-contested mastery of Canaan. 

The approach directly northward was blocked by fortress cities 
and the superior equipment of the Canaanites, trained to fighting 
through centuries of feuds and foreign war, and ever alert against 
marauding nomads. The tribes moving from Kadesh, therefore, 
turned eastward to press into the green tablelands east of the Jordan. 
But the region was already occupied. For the same great drift 
from the Arabian desert which had brought the first bands of He- 
brews into Canaan, had left here groups of tribes who won territory 
for themselves and attained nationality. These were Edom, south of 
the Dead Sea toward the east, Moab northward to the river Arnon 

107 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


and beyond, and Ammon from the borders of Moab northward to the 
Jabbok. Hebrew tradition recognized Israel’s kinship with them: 
for Esau-Edom was the elder twin-brother of Jacob; and Moab and 
Ammon were sons of Abraham’s nephew Lot. 

Community of racial stock, however, did not spell accord. Edom, 
hostilely inclined, barred the road to the newcomers’ eastward 
march. What the younger brother could not gain by force he at- 
tempted to secure through negotiation. The account of Israel’s par- 
ley with the king of Edom sketches the nomad manner of life and 
the punctilious formalities of intertribal exchange. 


Moses sent messengers from Kadesh unto the king of Edom, Thus 
saith thy brother Israel, Behold, we are in Kadesh, a city in the 
uttermost of thy border: let us pass, I pray thee, through thy land: 
we will not pass through field or through vineyard, neither will we 
drink of the water of the wells: we will go along the king’s highway, 
we will not turn aside to the right hand nor to the left, until we have 
passed thy border. . . . If we drink of thy water, I and my cattle, then 
will I give the price thereof: let me only, without doing anything 
else, pass through on my feet. And he said, Thou shalt not pass 
through. And Edom came out against him with much people, and 
with a strong hand. Wherefore Israel turned away from him. 


Willingness to observe the rules did not avail the weak against the 
strong. The wanderers, who had left Kadesh in quest of pasturage, 
were compelled to march around the borders of their elder kinsmen 
established on the soil. Pressing into Moab from the east, after their 
wide circuit of Edom, they met with better success. For Moab had 
already yielded to the domination of a foreign aggressor. The Amo- 
rites, whose rebellion against the suzerainty of Egypt in Syria is re- 
counted in the Amarna letters, had swept southward and possessed 
themselves of the cities of the eastern tablelands. Their king, Sihon, 
had set his capital in Heshbon. It was with the Amorites, therefore, 

108 


DAYBREAK 


lords of a conquered people, that Israel had to contend for entrance 
into the land. As in the case of Edom, the Israelites opened negotia- 
tions with Sihon by a request for friendly passage across his territory. 
Refusal was followed by armed attack; Israel defeated the Amo- 
rites, and finally, according to the narrative, occupied their cities. 
Whether the Moabites themselves shared in the campaign, on the 
one side or the other, yet as they had before submitted to the Amo- 
rites, so now in time they became subject to the victorious invaders 
from the desert. 

Whatever the success of the Israelites in the region east of the 
Jordan, it is probable that they rested long here before attempting 
to cross into Canaan. The land, renowned for its fertility, was amply 
suited to the grazing of their flocks. Here Gad and Reuben remained 
in permanent possession. Possibly Gad was not among the tribes 
that came up out of Egypt. As the son of Jacob’s concubine, he had 
only a remote relationship with Israel; and later he was merged with 
the Moabites, among whom he dwelt. Reuben, though accounted the 
firstborn, was early detached from his brothers, and he played 
little, if any, part in the conquest of Canaan. Both Reuben and Gad 
were reproached by Deborah that they came not to the help of their 
brethren in the war against Sisera. Their history, obscurely inter- 
woven with the fortunes of Israel, is typical of the accidental, un- 
stable ties which linked the tribes in a common enterprise or again 
loosed them along divergent ways. 

While the Hebrews lingered east of the Jordan, they may have 
experienced the beginnings of that change in material condition which 
was wrought out finally in Canaan. The Moabites, coming origi- 
nally from the desert, were already a farmer people like the Canaan- 
ites, and like them, they had many cities. Established on the soil, 
tribes had become a nation, ruled by kings. Their god Chemosh was 

109 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


a god of the whole people. An inscription of their king Mesha, dating 
from the ninth century B.c., gives evidence of a long practice in the 
art of writing. Settlement on the land, therefore, had made possible 
a development of civilization far in advance of the old tribal manner 
of life. So the example of the Moabites, as the Hebrews sojourned 
among them, doubtless worked upon the newcomers. Memories of 
these influences survived in Israelite tradition. “The people began 
to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab: for they called the 
people unto the sacrifices of their gods; and the people did eat, and 
bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto the Baal 
of Peor.”’ The late Priestly note of the intercourse of Israelites with 
““Midianite” women, occurring in this context, may represent the 
same early experience of the tribes in the midst of an alien people. 
As happened afterwards in Canaan, so now the invaders intermar- 
ried with the resident population. In consequence of this partial 
fusion of the two groups, the sons of Jacob, forgetting their new al- 
legiance to Yahweh, were seduced to the worship of other gods. The 
punishment which Yahweh visited upon his unfaithful people may 
symbolize the fact that some of the Hebrews, detached thus from 
their group, were permanently lost to their brethren. When the bond 
of common devotion to the one God of Sinai was relaxed, the dis- 
loyal clans might not be accounted to Israel. 

In Moab, tradition tells, Moses died. And the leadership passed 
to a chief of the tribe of Ephraim, to Joshua, who was the first of the 
heroes of Israel who bore in his own name the name of Yahweh. 


But the conquering Hebrew tribes at ease in the fertile tablelands 
east of the Jordan had not yet reached the term of their adventures. 
From the heights they looked out over Canaan, which invited their 
increasing numbers to further conquest. When at length the fields of 

110 


DAYBREAK 


Moab no more sufficed, the militant shepherds, struggling down by 
rocky paths to the Jordan, forded the swift current and threw them- 
selves against the strong city of Jericho. 

Secure within massive walls of stone and brick, dominated by the 
citadel, Jericho was not to be stormed by nomad bands lacking en- 
gines of assault. As in the days of Abraham and Jacob, what Israel 
could not win by force it accomplished by guile and stratagem. Two 
spies sent forward by Joshua toward nightfall penetrated the city 
gate, and came to a harlot’s house upon the great wall. Here their 
presence might be least remarked; and here too they might find some 
loose fellows whom they could persuade to treachery. Even so, news 
of the strangers had already reached the king. But the harlot 
Rahab hid the men upon the roof among stalks of flax which she had 
laid out to dry; and the king’s officers despatched to apprehend the 
spies were deluded with evasive words. “Yea, the men came unto 
me, but I wist not whence they were: and it came to pass about the 
time of the shutting of the gate, when it was dark, that the men went 
out: whither the men went I[ wot not: pursue after them quickly; for 
ye shall overtake them.’ And the men pursued after them the way 
to Jordan unto the fords: and as soon as they that pursued were gone 
out, the gate was closed. Then Rahab let the men down by a cord 
upon the wall, and they escaped to the mountains. After three days, 
while their pursuers sought them vainly, they came again to Joshua. 

The tribes moved forward and surrounded the city, so that it was 
straitly shut within its gates. Thereupon the narrative recounts the 
fall of Jericho in terms difficult to translate into historic fact. Seven 
priests bearing seven trumpets of rams’ horns, the armed men going 
before them, and the Ark of Yahweh and the multitude of the people 
following, compassed the city seven days, blowing the trumpets. On 
the seventh day, they marched round seven times. At the seventh 

Ill 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


time, the seven priests blew a mighty blast upon the horns, the 
people raised a great shout, and the walls of Jericho fell. The vic- 
tors, saving alive only Rahab and her family, burned the city and all 
that was in it with fire; and they set a curse upon the ruins. In this 
procedure with its repeated insistence upon the mystic number seven, 
it is evident that the spirit of magic pervaded the traditions. The 
figure of Rahab may represent certain of the people of Jericho, per- 
haps Hebrews of an earlier day already received into citizenship, 
who treacherously ranged themselves on the side of the assailants, in 
whom they recognized the kinship of a common origin. A fortified 
city of the strength of Jericho could be taken only by treachery from 
within or by the surprise of stratagem. That the city should be 
burned by the victors was a matter of course. The invaders, so far as 
lay in their power, put the inhabitants to the sword, and in the name 
of their god wrought utter destruction of material. The episode of 
the spies and Rahab reflects an image of life in an ancient Canaanite 
city; and the conquest of Jericho was typical of the difficulties 
which lay before the oncoming tribes and of the fierce ardor which 
made possible their first successes. 

From Jericho the Hebrews pressed westward against Ai, set among 
the hills. Their spies had reported that the people of Ai were but 
few; and in order that all Israel might not needlessly toil up thither, 
Joshua sent forward a small detachment. But the men of Ai beat 
them off with loss. Then Joshua placed troops in ambush west of 
the city, while the main body from the east moved as if to attack. 
The townsmen rushed out to meet these assailants, leaving the city 
unguarded; and the Israelites seemed to flee. Thereupon the troops 
in ambush seized the city and set it on fire. The Canaanites, caught 
thus between two forces, front and rear, were defeated and put to 
the sword. The king of Ai, however, the victors took alive: they | 

112 


DAYBREAK 


hanged him upon a tree until the evening; then cutting down the 
body, they cast it at the entrance of the gate of the city, and raised 
thereon a great pile of stones. The cattle and the spoils this time 
they saved for themselves. But they burned the city, and made it a 
heap of ruins and a desolation. 

Yet stratagem was not exclusively on the side of Israel. About a 
day’s journey west of the Hebrews’ camp, the city of Gibeon lay 
exposed to a further march of the invaders. “When the inhabitants 
of Gibeon heard what Joshua had done unto Jericho and to Ai, they 
also did work wilily, and went and made as if they had been ambas- 
sadors, and took old sacks upon their asses, and wine-skins, old and 
rent and bound up; and old shoes and clouted upon their feet, and 
old garments upon them; and all the bread of their provision was dry 
and was become mouldy. And they went to Joshua unto the camp 
at Gilgal, and said unto him, and to the men of Israel, We are come 
from a far country: now therefore make ye a covenant with us.” 
The Hebrews, neglecting to consult the sacred lot, were deceived; 
and they made a treaty with the Gibeonites. When they learned 
the truth, they still remained faithful to their oath, to let the peo- 
ple live; but in time and by superior numbers, they constrained 
the Gibeonites to serve them, — to be gatherers of wood and drawers 
of water for the sanctuary of Yahweh. Partly by success in battle, 
partly by treaty with the inhabitants, Israel was advancing into 
the gradual occupation of Canaan. 

The forward sweep into Canaan of militant tribes from beyond 
the Jordan, with the fall of Jericho and Ai in their victorious course 
and the capitulation of Gibeon, disquieted cities to the westward, 
which perceived the menace of their advance. The king of Jerusa- 
lem, summoning four other kings to alliance with him, proposed an 
attack on the Gibeonites, who had weakly made terms with the 

113 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


aggressive Hebrews. Gibeon, which had no king but yet was “‘as one 
of the royal cities” in importance, may have belonged to the terri- 
tory subject to Jerusalem, whose ruler therefore sought to hold the 
daughter city to its allegiance. When the five kings with all their 
hosts went up and encamped against Gibeon, its people called to the 
conquering tribes to help. Joshua and all the troops and all the hero 
captains, by a forced night march, took their enemies by surprise 
and routed them with great slaughter. The five kings in wild flight 
hid themselves in a cave. The Israelites rolled huge stones to the 
mouth of it and set men to keep it, while they continued the pursuit 
of the broken foe, until the remnant found refuge in their fenced 
cities. Balked by these fortresses, they returned to the cave and 
brought forth the five kings to Joshua, who commanded his captains 
to put their feet on the necks of the kings, to symbolize their present 
triumph — and also to work magically for the future. And after- 
ward Joshua smote them, and put them to death, and hanged them 
on five trees until the evening. At sunset they took them down 
from the trees, and cast them into the cave, and laid great stones 
at the mouth of it. 

Conditions in Canaan as shadowed forth in the narrative here 
have not changed through the two centuries and more since the 
Amarna letters pictured the turmoil of the land. Abd-khiba, king 
of Jerusalem, had much to report to his Egyptian overlord in bitter 
complaint of the ravages of the Khabiru; and the later king found 
himself in similar plight. Now, as then, some cities made common 
cause with the marauders to throw off their allegiance to their ruler 
in the mother city; with the result that the newcomers established 
themselves in permanent occupation. Or certain of the petty kings 
combined in alliance to resist the onslaught of tribes from the desert 


borders, not always with success. Whatever their numbers and the 
114 


DAYBREAK 


limited scope of their first conquests, the fierce tribes of Israel lacked 
nothing of the terror which the ancestral Khabiru inspired in Canaan. 

Northward, as they pressed into the land, the Israelites encoun- 
tered another coalition of kings; and here they had to meet a new 
method of warfare. Their earlier victories were won among the hills; 
now they entered the plains, where their adversaries had drawn up a 
great force equipped with horses and chariots. Howbeit, by a sud- 
den attack, wherein perhaps surprise and cunning mingled with their 
valor, the Israelites defeated their assembled enemies; and they 
houghed the horses, and burned the chariots with fire. 


Somewhat in these terms the Ephraimite historian of Israel, writ- 
ing three or four centuries afterwards, conceived the conquest of the 
promised land; and so, later generations viewed it. Whatever may 
be the historic facts underlying the narratives, yet the instances 
cited are in part representative of the long course of the Israelites’ 
occupation of Canaan. The settlement of the tribes was a process of 
gradual penetration, by force of numbers, by victory in armed con- 
flict, by treaty, or by sufferance of the local native population. The 
Hebrews entered Canaan not as a definitely compact body under a 
single common leadership, but in groups and independently, each 
for itself, as circumstances determined. Some tribes, like Judah with 
its affiliated clans, doubtless pressed in from the south, and estab- 
lished themselves in the region about Hebron, later the capital of 
King David, before he took Jerusalem. Others, chief among them 
the Joseph tribes, crossing the Jordan from the east, won for them- 
selves at first the barren and less densely peopled reaches of the 
highlands. Still other tribes, reckoned to the children of Israel, like 
Asher, mentioned as a Canaanite group in an inscription of Ramses 
II, a century before the Israelite conquest, probably therefore were 

115 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


settled already in the land when their kinsmen set out from Kadesh 
to fight and triumph in the name of Yahweh. Asher and similar out- 
lying tribes were accounted to Yahweh’s people in the very early 
Song of Deborah, which was virtually contemporaneous with the 
events it recites. But on the other hand, the genuinely old traditions 
recognize that as the sons of concubines their relationship in Jacob’s 
family was more remote than that of their brethren of legitimate 
strain; yet the narratives do not reveal at what moment or by what 
occasions these tribes were united with Israel. 

The actual conquest of Canaan, therefore, was as fragmentary as 
it was gradual. The Israelites of the north and of the south were 
divided by a line of strong cities from Jerusalem in the east to Gezer 
in the west, which remained Canaanite until after the establishment 
of the kingdom. In the lowlands and the maritime plain, the tribes 
made way only with the slow lapse of time: for here the walled cities 
and the “cities set on their mounds” successfully repelled the attack 
of undisciplined tribes; and the terrain gave scope to deploy the cav- 
alry and iron chariots with which the Canaanites were furnished 
abundantly. Against such forces the rude bands trained only in 
the desert could not advance in the first shock of numbers; their op- 
portunity lay rather in hill fighting, with its chances of ambush and 
sudden raid. The tribes reached the end of their wanderings by 
diverse ways; and equally varied were the conditions of their settle- 
ment. It was not until their political unification under the mon- 
archy that they began to have a common history. But they were 
one in racial origin, and of similar earliest experience; and all shared, 
though in different measure, in the moulding of their common genius. 


When the Hebrews swept in upon Canaan, they were still im- 
pelled by a fierce vehemence, born of the desert. As they threw 
116 


DAYBREAK 


themselves, ill-equipped but shouting their wild battle-cries, against 
the strong cities, the terror they spread abroad counted to them for 
strength. Victorious, they were fanatic and pitiless. The cruelty of 
their passionate race was intensified by divine sanction, for Israel’s 
battles were the battles of Yahweh, God of hosts. So they “de- 
voted”’ to Yahweh the defeated enemy. The ban implied utter ex- 
termination: to the conquered, death by the sword, by burning, 
hanging, stoning; and complete destruction of material. Israel had 
yet to affirm its difference from other peoples. The tribes who pene- 
trated Canaan were hardly to be distinguished from their kindred of 
the desert, except for their newly won knowledge of Yahweh, a 
knowledge fraught with immense potencies. The acceptance of 
Yahweh as Israel’s sole God, though decisive, wrought no sudden 
metamorphosis. To transfigure the tribal god of a few nomad clans 
into the creator and supreme spiritual ruler of the world was the 
achievement of a peculiarly gifted people across centuries of extreme 
vicissitudes. 


VII 
THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


By separate ways and at different moments, certain Hebrew tribes, 
wanderers of old time from out of the desert, winning a seat in the 
bounteous land of Canaan, there struck root in the soil. It was yet a 
century before the several tribes, traditionally twelve in number, 
were united as a single people under a king. From the beginning 
each tribe had its individual fortunes; and therein it had moulded a 
characteristic personality. The edge of tribal consciousness was 
never blunted. In after ages Israel delighted to commemorate the 
ancestral fibre and deeds of prowess that made the nation. During 
the reign of splendid Solomon, ancient songs of the tribes were gath- 
ered into a poem ascribed dramatically to the paternal pride of 
Jacob; and some generations later, similar songs were attributed to 
the prophetic inspiration of Moses. The Blessing of Jacob (Gen. 49) 
and the Blessing of Moses (Deut. 33) were framed collectively to 
signalize the distinction of the various tribes as it was expressed in 
their special temper and adventures. 

Reuben, first born of Israel, yet failed of leadership because of his 
inconstancy ; unfaithful to his trust, he dishonored his father’s name. 
So Deborah too reproached him that he came not to aid his brethren 
against the common enemy. But though his men are now few, his 
kinship with the parent stock is still remembered, for Moses’ song 
utters the hope that he may live and not die. Perhaps Reuben early 
allied himself with a native group east of the Jordan, and surrender- 
ing thus his identity as a Hebrew tribe, was in time lost to Israel. 

_ Simeon and Levi, as likewise elder sons of Jacob, may have entered 
118 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


Canaan in the van of the Israelite invasion. It suited their character 
to lead the way, for they were true children of the desert, turbulent 
and breathing fury. Weapons of violence were their swords; fierce 
was their anger and their wrath was cruel. Treacherously violating 
their compacts, they were ruthless in slaying; and they devastated 
wantonly: — an echo of their infamous deed in Shechem. But their 
ferocity availed not to get them a footing in the land; for the real 
conquest of Canaan fell to their more pliant brothers who followed 
them. Simeon, in the far south, became few and was absorbed in the 
expanding tribe of Judah. Levi as a tribe disappeared completely.! 
Thus were the atrocious ones divided in Jacob and scattered in Israel. 

The fortunes of Judah unfold successively. At first fighting alone, 
“with his hands he contended for himself,’ he remained separated 
from his brethren by a line of strong cities which resisted the invad- 
ers until the time of David. May Yahweh hear his voice and bring 
him in unto his people! Then the Judahite poet’s song, on the lips 
of Jacob, celebrates the glories of the youngest of Leah’s sons. As 
the lion is lord of the jungle, so Judah is king among men; and like 
the lion, he lives by his strength. The choicest domain of Canaan is 
his portion. Mounted regally upon an ass’s colt he may, when he 
will, bind his beast to the vine, so abundantly sturdy are its stalks. 
Plenteously may he wash his vesture in the blood of the grape. His 
eyes gleam with the exaltation of the cup, and his teeth are white 
with milk. The poet’s ecstasy does not overpass the truth; for the 
shepherd Judah, advancing from the wilderness of the south into 
the grazing lands and vine-clad hills with ever growing power, gave 
Israel its greatest king. 

Zebulon in the north set his borders by the sea, neighbor to the 


1 For some reason not now understood, the name Levite was used to designate 
a certain class of priests. 


119 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Pheenicians, established anciently and famous for their trading ships. 
Close by Zebulon dwelt his full brother Issachar. The newcomers 
learned to traffic in the products of ocean and shore, sucking the 
abundance of the seas and the hidden treasures of the sand. To gain 
a place for himself Issachar, because the land was pleasant, forswore 
his strength; bowing his shoulder to bear, he became a servant under 
task work, — as many other clans must have done as they merged 
with the native Canaanites. But something of the ancestral warlike 
spirit survived, for the chieftains of Issachar went out with their 
brother tribes to fight against Sisera. 

The little tribe of Dan, not of legitimate strain, maintained itself 
through many changes of estate. An antique story relates the migra- 
tion of the Danites: how under increasing pressure of their hostile 
neighbors in the region west of Jerusalem, they sent forth scouts to 
spy out the land northward and search it; how they set forward 
thither, six hundred armed men with their families and cattle and 
goods moving before them; how on the way, in the hill country of 
Ephraim, they despoiled a man of his shrine and its images, and bore 
it off with them; how they came to Laish in the distant north, belong- 
ing to a people which dwelt apart in quiet and security, but because 
there was none to save them, the militant tribe put the inhabitants 
to the sword and burned the city. On the site of the old, they built 
for themselves a new city, which they called Dan after the name of 
their father. With accordant metaphor the poems figure Dan as once 
a lion’s whelp leaping forth from Bashan, but now become a serpent 
in the path, striking from behind; he bites the horse’s heels so that 
the rider falls backward. The tribe’s waning strength turned to cun- 
ning, which barely served against all the foes who threatened to over- 
whelm it; for the hope is expressed that Dan may still judge his people 
“as one of the tribes of Israel,” received into full brotherhood. 

120 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


Gad, born of Jacob and a concubine, was akin to the Israelite 
tribes, but he was not among those that entered Canaan. Settled 
east of the Jordan, he was exposed to the raids of nomad bands; but 
like a lioness of the desert, he was fierce to rend his prey. Later he 
was merged with the Moabites. 

Gad’s blood-brother Asher, whose borders marched with the Si- 
donians in the garden lands north of Carmel, reaped opulence, 
dainties for the table of a king; his bread was fatness and he dipped 
his feet in oil. With bars of iron and brass strong were his cities. 
Thence eastward, equally fortunate was Naphtali, full with the 
blessing of Yahweh. 

Befitting his station, Joseph, elder born of the favorite wife Ra- 
chel, is acclaimed a prince among his brethren. His mettle proved 
over harrying bowmen of the desert, now with the power of a wild ox 
shall he push all peoples even to the ends of the earth. Implanted in 
the most luxuriant reaches of the land, he is a fruitful bough by a 
fountain. A firstling bullock, majesty is his. In blessing upon him 
are lavished the utmost treasures of exuberant imagination: — the 
precious things of heaven, the dew, and the deep that coucheth be- 
neath, the precious things of the fruits of the sun, the precious things 
of the growth of the moon, the chief things of the ancient moun- 
tains, the precious things of the everlasting hills, the precious things 
of the earth and the fulness thereof. It is a vision of Israel in the 
zenith of its brief worldly glory. 

Benjamin, “son of the south,” the youngest of all Jacob’s chil- 
dren, gave Israel its first king. His lot was less favored than that of 
his full brother Joseph: for he had to maintain himself by his might 
in war; his portion in the land touched the strong cities of Jerusalem 
and Gezer, fortresses still Canaanite, and it neared the borders of 
the redoubtable Philistines. The old desert spirit was yet quick in 

121 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL’ 


him, and he lived by raiding merchant caravans that filed through 
his territory. So Benjamin is likened to a ravening wolf that in the 
morning devours his prey, but at evening divides the spoil. 

Imagery suggested by the great facts of their environment leaps 
to the poets’ command. The lion, the wild ox, the wolf, the serpent 
are instant memories of the desert, from which Israel had come but 
recently. The strong ass crouching down between the sheepfolds, 
the ass’s colt upon which the nobles of the people were wont to ride, 
the vine and the fruitful bough, the gains of trafficking and the gen- 
erous yield of earth’s bounty, — these images of life on the soil glow 
with the first freshness of a new world hardly won. The union of the 
tribes in a monarchy was the height from which the poets who wrote 
down these songs of the people looked out over the nation. Even 
then the tribes were figured as individuals; but still more were they 
separate and distinct as they fought their way into the land. During 
the century preceding their union, along their slow, uncertain course 
to the mastery of Canaan, “‘there was no king in Israel, and every 
man did what was right in his own eyes.” 


It was a time of anarchy throughout the country. The weakened 
grasp of Egypt was now withdrawn entirely; and no other power then 
was strong enough to assert its aggressive authority in a land that 
had known so many conquerors. Some of the Canaanite cities, ever 
at feud with one another, continued to hold sway each over a limited 
territory, but a general government was wholly lacking. There was 
little peace and no security. “Caravans ceased; and the travellers 
walked through by-ways.” The invaders, on their part, had not yet 
established themselves in undisputed possession. Wars were still to 
be fought with the Canaanites; and as of old, marauders from the 
desert menaced the produce of labor on the soil. In the regions where 

122 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


the newcomers had proved stronger than the native peoples, they 
were beginning to dominate the older population; elsewhere, “they 
dwelt in the midst of the Canaanites, for they did not drive them 
out.’ But the Israelites in their turn were vanquished in another 
sense. For the radical change of all their immemorial customs 
threatened the extinction of their fiercely cherished tribal individ- 
uality. ‘The children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the 
Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and 
the Jebusites: and they took their daughters to be their wives, and 
gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their gods.’”’ So 
intermarriage with the farmer folk wore away the barriers of self- 
conscious tribal exclusiveness; and the accidental links of immediate 
association and locality were replacing the old ties of kinship. Wan- 
dering keepers of sheep became husbandmen attached to the land. 

The ancestral turbulence yielded inevitably to the arts of settled 
life, so that “‘no shield or spear was seen among the forty thousand 
in Israel.’’ Now for the good things of earth, denied them before, 
they were indebted to other gods than their own God of the barren 
steppes; and the intensive worship of Yahweh, which had drawn 
them together on the border of Canaan, was diffused into the service 
of the local baals. “They chose new gods.” In the absorption of the 
newcomers with the native peoples, the ancient tribal organization 
was breaking up: “the rulers ceased in Israel.’”’ The tribes, by nature 
individualistic and loving freedom, had not yet arrived at the cen- 
tralized constraint of kingship; for the waning authority of the 
sheikh was transformed but slowly into the power accruing to the 
city prince. 

Thus two opposed forces were at work to mould the temper of I[s- 
rael. Tenacity of old forms and customs, which made the fibre of the 


race, was set against the necessity of change imposed by new condi- 
123 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


tions. The gradual resolution of the conflict, after several ventures, 
came with the union of the tribes under a king. But during the first 
century of their settlement in Canaan, they were assailed by enemies 
from without and disintegrating influences within. Tribal rivalries 
were bitter; and only at a moment of extreme crisis which imperilled 
their common existence were the sons of Jacob able to unite for a 
common end. 

Few memories of these troubled early days lingered on in the 
kingdom. Traditions of the tribes recalled great deeds of their 
heroes; but mere fragments of them were all that survived in the 
written history of the nation. A very ancient poem, rehearsed from 
age to age in the happy workaday times of peace, “far from the 
noise of archers, in the places of drawing water,” celebrated the de- 
cisive victory of Israel over its Canaanite enemies. These several 
strands of story and song, close to the lives of men, were woven by 
eagerly devout preceptors of later generations into a narrative, the 
Book of Judges, which should exemplify the mysterious wisdom of 
Yahweh’s dealings with his wayward people. Yet the legends thus 
preserved still kept their ancient grain; and with the vividness of 
direct experience they disclose brief glimpses of Israel in the making. 


The fierce passions of the old days flared up in the exploit of Ehud 
the Benjaminite. His tribe, settled west of the Jordan in the region 
of Jericho, was open to constant attack by the Moabites from across 
the river. These had so far prevailed that they possessed the Ben- 
jaminite City of Palm Trees, and forced the people to pay tribute to 
Moab. After years of oppression, Ehud rose up to deliver his kins- 
men by a bloody and cunning deed. The hero fashioned for himself a 
two-edged sword, a cubit long; and being a left-handed man, he 
girded the weapon under his raiment on the right thigh, where it 

124 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


might escape detection. At the head of the train that bore the trib- 
ute, he sought an audience with Eglon, the Moabite king. After the 
present had been offered and the bearers were dismissed, Ehud, who 
had departed with them a little way, returned, saying, ‘“‘I have a se- 
cret errand unto thee, O king!” Eglon, seated in royal refreshing 
in his cool upper chamber, commanded silence, and his attendants 
withdrew. Face to face with the king alone, — it was the moment 
the wily Benjaminite had contrived. Then he said, “I have a mes- 
sage from God unto thee.” The king, a very fat man, rose heavily to 
receive the divine communication. 


And Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the sword from his 
right thigh, and thrust it into his belly: and the haft also went in after 
the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not 
draw the sword out of his belly; and the dirt came out. Then Ehud 
went forth through the porch, and shut the doors of the parlor upon 
him, and locked them. When he was gone out, the king’s servants 
came; and when they saw that, behold, the doors of the parlor were 
locked, they said, Surely he doeth his easement in his summer 
chamber. And they tarried till they were ashamed: and, behold, he 
opened not the doors of the parlor; therefore they took a key, and 
opened them: and, behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the 
earth. 


In the confusion, the assassin made good his flight. Arrived in his 
homeland, Ehud blew a trumpet in the hill country of Ephraim. His 
kinsmen, rallying to the summons, followed his lead down from the 
hills, and smote the Moabites at the fords of the Jordan so that none 
of them escaped. 

The primal relish of violence and cunning savors the grim humor of 
the story, recited to exulting acclaim around the evening fire. By 
guile the mere tribesman outwits the mighty king, though at the 
fatal moment the crafty one does not lack indeed the resolution to 

125 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


thrust home. The hero knows how even to turn his physical defect to 
advantage. Deity itself, in this rude age, is not too sacred or remote 
from men to serve as pretext to the profit of his enterprise. Then 
with a tremendous power of dramatic contrast, sheer horror breaks in 
hoarse laughter. Outside the bolted door, the attendants wait upon 
the necessity of their royal master; within, sprawls the body of the 
fat king in his blood and filth. Though Israel created no great drama, 
the elements of it lay close at hand in the vivid figments of popular 
imagination. The capture of Jericho by the Moabites and their ex- 
pulsion by the settlers whose territory they had seized, may well have 
been a fact in the history of early Israel. Whether fact or imagining, 
the story of Ehud’s deed is eternally true to the spirit of the tribes. 

Neighbor to Benjamin on the north, the Joseph tribes of Ephraim 
and Manasseh suffered from continual depredations of the Midian- 
ites; for when the Israelites had sown, the children of the East, like 
locusts for multitude, came up with their tents, their camels and their 
cattle, and encamped against them. Year after year the raiders de- 
stroyed the increase of the earth and left no sustenance in Israel, 
neither sheep nor ox nor ass. The people fled their fields, seeking ref- 
uge in the dens and caves of the mountains. So meagre was the yield 
of the harvest for such as remained, that the floor of a winepress suf- 
ficed for the threshing. At length it fell to a man of the little clan of 
Abiezer in Manasseh to rid the land of its enemies. The story has it 
that Gideon, while beating out wheat in his winepress, received the 
call of Yahweh to save Israel from the hand of the Midianites; but an 
altogether human incitement spurred him to action, for the maraud- 
ers had slain his brothers, and upon him therefore was laid the stern 
duty of blood revenge. Summoning three hundred of his clansmen, 
he pursued the Midianites, who had withdrawn across the Jordan 


after their devastations; by a stratagem recalling the tactics of 
126 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL — 


Joshua at Jericho, he threw their hosts into a panic, and finally took 
captive their two kings. 

Tradition was busy with the fame of Gideon, also named in one 
strand Jerubbaal, and legends multiplied of his exploits. Into the 
narrative of his victory over Midian are plaited two differing ac- 
counts, both of which illustrate the manner of the times. In one ac- 
count Gideon summoned Manasseh, Asher, Zebulon and Naphtali 
to his aid; only when the marauders were in full flight did he call his 
brethren of Ephraim. The Ephraimites succeeded in capturing the 
two Midianite chieftains, Oreb — the Raven, and Zeeb — the Wolf; 
but they chided Gideon that he had not bidden them at the first. 
For tribal jealousy was strong. With figurative crafty eloquence Gid- 
eon turned aside their wrath with fair words: ““What have I done 
now in comparison of you? Is not the gleaning of the grapes of 
Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer? God hath delivered into 
your hand the princes of Midian, Oreb and Zeeb: and what was I able 
to do in comparison of youd” Then their anger was abated toward 
him, when he had said that. The other account reveals Gideon as a 
man of action after the antique pattern. In the headlong pursuit of 
Midian beyond Jordan, Gideon came to Succoth, and there begged 
~ refection for his fainting men. But the princes of the city answered 
him scoffingly. Then said Gideon: ‘‘ Therefore when Yahweh hath de- 
livered Zebah and Zalmunna into mine hand, then I will thresh your 
flesh with the thorns of the wilderness and with briers.”” And he went 
up thence to Penuel, and spake likewise; and the men of Penuel an- 
swered him as the men of Succoth had answered. And he spake also 
unto the men of Penuel, saying, “‘ When I come again in peace, I will 
break down this tower.” And Gideon proved his word. 

The narrative of the victory ends with a scene in old heroic style. 
The Israelite who left his threshing to lead his clansmen to war, now 

127 


‘THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


confronts his captives menacingly. The Bedawy chieftains, in purple 
raiment, and adorned with golden earrings and pendants, with gold 
chains and crescents about their camels’ necks, are splendid imposing 
figures even in their humiliation. To Gideon’s challenge, “What 
manner of men were they whom ye slew at Tabor)” the sheikhs un- 
daunted answer haughtily, ‘‘ As thou art, so were they; each one re- 
sembled the children of a king!’’ Then cries Gideon, mollified by the 
shrewd reply, but remembering his dead, “They were my brethren, 
the sons of my mother: as Yahweh liveth, if ye had saved them alive, 
I would not slay you.”’ But the blood of the murdered demands venge- 
ance. Gideon turns to Jethro, his firstborn, “Up, and slay them!” 
For the penalty which he himself hesitates to exact devolves next 
upon his oldest son. But the youth drew not his sword: for he feared, 
because he was yet a youth. Then Zebah and Zalmunna, proudly 
awaiting the wild justice they would mete to another in like circum- 
stances, ask only, “Rise thou, and fall upon us: for as the man is, so 
is his strength.”’ And Gideon arose, and slew Zebah and Zalmunna, 
and took away the crescents that were on their camels’ necks. 
Gideon returned to his people in triumph. His tribesmen would 
make him king over them. He might thus found a royal house, for 
the dignity was to pass to his son and his son’s son. But the hero, ac- 
cording to a later form of the narrative, put aside the proffered honor, 
for the glory of Yahweh; only God should be king of Israel. Never- 
theless, Gideon lived in regal state. He had many wives, and seventy 
sons, besides a concubine in the city of Shechem, who bore him a son, 
Abimelech. With the spoils taken from Midian, he established in his 
residence city of Ophrah a sanctuary like the sanctuary of a king. 
The story that follows of Gideon’s son Abimelech and his brief 
kingship illustrates the complex, vaguely defined relations existing 
between the newly settled Hebrew invaders and the older population, 
128 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


at the period of transition from the occupation of Canaan by the 
tribes to the founding of the monarchy in Israel. The narrative is 
significant also for the instance it affords of local politics and intrigue 
in these early days. 

Gideon, now the chief of his tribe Manasseh, had espoused a 
Canaanite woman, who as the custom might be, remained with her 
father’s house in her home city. The Israelite leader, though residing 
at Ophrah, had yet some kind of authority in the neighboring city of 
Shechem, for its people recognized, after Gideon’s death, the pre- 
tensions of his seventy sons to rule over them. Their half-brother 
Abimelech, however, the son of the Shechemite woman, came for- 
ward to dispute their right. Returning to his mother’s kinsmen in 
Shechem, he said to all the clan of the house of his mother’s father, 
“Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether 
it is better for you that all the sons of Jerubbaal (that is, Gideon) 
which are three score and ten persons, rule over you, or that one rule 
over you? Remember also that I am your bone and your flesh.” By 
this appeal to the all-powerful tie of blood, the Shechemites were so 
won to the adventurer that they financed his cause by funds ab- 
stracted from the temple treasury. With the money, Abimelech 
hired vain and worthless fellows; and at the head of his band f ruf- 
fians, he went to his father’s house at Ophrah and slew his seventy 
brothers, except Jotham the youngest, who escaped, for he hid him- 
self. Already accepted by the Canaanites of Shechem, the usurper 
hoped by this ruthless act to affirm his power also over the Israelite 
group whose seat was in Ophrah. 

With ceremonies at the sacred tree, the men of Shechem made 
Abimelech king. Then Jotham, learning of what was taking place 
to his own hurt, appeared before them; the rightful heir, who had 
barely escaped the violence of the usurper, now dared to challenge 

129 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


his pretensions. From a commanding position on the mountain 
which overlooked the city, not without regard to his own personal 
safety, Jotham harangued the crowd. In the picturesque terms of an 
ingenious fable, he derided the populace for the unwisdom of their 
doing, and pronounced a curse upon Shechem and its new king. Not 
waiting to note the effect of his bold, mocking words, the Israelite 
princeling fled the city; and he figures no more. 

Where Jotham had failed to sow discord between the Shechemites 
and their king, a stranger-sojourner in the city succeeded. Abime- 
lech had reigned for three years. Residing at some distance from 
Shechem, he was represented in the city by his officer Zebul. There 
entered now on the scene one Gaal, who had settled in Shechem with 
all his family; a man of ready tongue, he had gained the credence of 
the citizens. On the occasion of a vintage festival, when the people 
were eating and drinking in the temple precincts, sedition began to 
stir against Abimelech, the half-Israelite, absentee king. Then Gaal, 
self-appointed spokesman of the rising agitation, declaimed in brag- 
gart words to the fickle crowd, heated with wine, “Who is this Abi- 
melech, son of the Israelite Jerubbaal, that we men of Shechem, of 
the ancient stock, should serve him? And Zebul, governor of our 
city, he is only Abimelech’s officer! Why should we recognize their 
authority? Would that this people were under my hand! then would 
I remove Abimelech.” Gaal, the stranger resident, was more She- 
chemite than the Shechemites themselves! Zebul, hearing the sedi- 
tious outcry and angered by the slur upon his own secondary title, 
despatched messengers to, Abimelech to inform him of the tumult’ 
fomented by Gaal. The king appeared before the city with his 
troops; Gaal, stung to a show of courage by Zebul’s taunts, went out 
to meet him, and was defeated. Zebul, his prerogative vindicated, 
drove forth Gaal and his kinsmen, that they should not dwell in 

130 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


Shechem. But apparently the expulsion of the chief.disturber did 
not end the revolt, for again Abimelech attacked Shechem; only by 
setting fire to the temple stronghold, in which the people had taken 
refuge, was he able to capture the city. To assure himself against 
further Canaanite disaffection, he slew the inhabitants and destroyed 
the city utterly, sowing it with salt in token of its extinction. 

Even so, Abimelech’s kingship was not secure. Another city, The- 
bez, presumably like Shechem more Canaanite than Israelite, re- 
belled. Leading in person the attack upon it, Abimelech met his 
death. As he drew near the strong tower to set fire to it, a woman 
cast an upper millstone upon his head and broke his skull. “Then he 
called hastily unto the young man, his armorbearer, and said unto 
him, Draw thy sword and kill me, that men say not of me, A woman 
‘slew him. And his young man thrust him through, and he died.” 
The fate feared by Abimelech fell to Sisera. 

The old narrative recounting the fortunes of Abimelech is gen- 
uinely historical. The human and dramatic interest of the story with 
its shrewdly drawn characterization plays against a background of 
the social conditions of the period. The Israelites were living among 
the older population in tentative mutual adjustment. The new- 
comers had not wholly won ascendancy; the Canaanites were ceasing 
to be actively hostile. The marriage of the chieftain of Manasseh 
with a woman of Shechem, still predominantly Canaanite, served to 
link the two groups more closely, and was doubtless typical of rela- 
tions in the large. That the men of Shechem should elect in favor of 
Abimelech was natural, for he was of their own stock, and from old 
time the cities of Canaan were accustomed to kingship; the rule of 
Gideon’s seventy sons, on the contrary, conformed to the Israelite 
system of leadership exercised by the tribal elders. In numbers and 
prowess, Israel seems to have been superior; but the Canaanites, 

131 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


taught by centuries, were more capable in administration and clev- 
erer in political intrigue. Israel had yet to learn the art of govern- 
ment; of which, moreover, it never was supremely master. 

Dispersed widely over the land, the Hebrew tribes had each its 
special difficulties to solve in its own way. That nevertheless they 
had interests in common was brought home to them by ‘their rally 
against a league of Canaanite kings. The great battle which fol- 
lowed in the plain of Jezreel seems to have been the last armed con- 
flict between the two peoples, for the victory of the Israelites was 
complete. The moment is undetermined. Tradition, poetry and 
legend are concerned but little with chronology. Things happened — 
once upon a time. The past, for a folk without recorded history, isa 
vague spacious region of no boundaries. The Song of Deborah, which 
celebrates immortally the triumph of Israel at the river Kishon, is 
very old; but it is probable that the battle which gained for the in- 
vaders the control of Canaan was fought long after their settlement. 
Dan had already reached his seat in the north; and his brethren were 
identified with their respective territories. The tribes were so far 
conformed to their present condition that the ancient desert temper 
was profoundly changed. The stern virtues of an elder time yielded 
to soft luxury. The nobles of the people rode on white asses; and 
rich carpets were spread for their ease. In a land flowing with milk 
and honey, a new generation forsook the austere God who had 
brought their fathers hither; and bending to the comfortable arts of 
peace, they renounced their primal valor. Then at an instant of 
crisis, a leader arose to summon them to war, as of old in the name 
of Yahweh, God of hosts. 

The Israelites were overwhelming the native peoples, forcing them 
to task-work. As in former days, the city-kings of Canaan had been 
able on occasion to unite for their common advantage, so now the 

132 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


cities of the plain arrayed their troops, commanded by King Sisera, 
to resist the alien tribesmen crowding down upon them from the hill © 
country. A prophetess in Israel perceived the menace to Yahweh’s 
people. With frenzied chant, she sounded the call to arms: 
Awake, awake, utter a song! 
Arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive! 

Perhaps the tribe of Naphtali, whose chieftain Barak was, already 
had taken the first shock of the Canaanite forces. Now other tribes 
responded gallantly to Deborah’s call. Powerful Ephraim came 
down, and captains of his brother Machir (Manasseh) with him; mar- 
tial Benjamin was quick to follow; Zebulon and Issachar left their 
trafficking to risk their lives side by side with Naphtali on the field of 
_ battle. Forever memorable and glorious were they, governors and 
people. Not so, their brother tribes who failed to heed the summons. 
Reuben sat craven among his sheepfolds, hearing not the war- 
trumpet but only the sweet piping for the flocks. Gilead (Gad) too 
abode in base security beyond Jordan. Dan remained among his 
ships, and prosperous Asher sat still at the haven of the sea. Judah, 
Simeon, and Levi are not named in the muster roll. Simeon and 
Levi were already scattered and lost to Israel; Judah, on his way up 
from the south, was not yet reckoned among the sons of Jacob. 

Then the kings of Canaan came and fought in Taanach, by the 
waters of Megiddo. But they took no spoil of booty in the battle, for 
the stars in their courses fought against Sisera. The river Kishon, 
swollen with the winter rains, entangled the wheels of their chariots 
and swept away their hosts. Sisera, fleeing from the field on foot, 
perished ingloriously at the hand of a Bedawy woman, in whose tent 
he had taken refuge. 

With swift contrast the action passes to the residence city of the 
Canaanite king. The queen-mother in her chamber, attended by the 

133 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


princesses of the royal harem, awaits the victorious return of Sisera. 
Impatient, anxious, afraid, for still the king comes not, she peers 
down through the lattice. “Why is his chariotry so long in com- 
ing?” She listens for the clatter of horses, faintly, louder, out of the 
distance — in vain. “Why tarry the hoof-beats of his chariots?” 
The keenest of her ladies, to quiet her quick-mounting dread, make 
answer, and the queen repeats to herself, fain to be persuaded, “Have 
they not found the spoil and now are dividing it, — a slave girl or 
two of them for every man, and booty of dyed stuffs for Sisera, a 
spoil of divers colors of embroidery for the neck of the queen?” And 
Sisera, the king, far away in the black tent of a nomad, lies bloody 
and broken at the feet of a woman. 

Magical in its power of evocation, the Song of Deborah recreates 
the age and scene. Across the plains of Canaan ancient cities reared 
their battlements. Centres of trade and industry, they commanded 
a luxury rivalling the wealth of Babylonia and Egypt. The flash of 
vision which reveals the palace interior of Sisera’s residence, with 
the royal ladies awaiting the battle-spoil of dyed stuffs and divers 
colors of embroidery, illumines the magnificence of the old Canaanite. 
civilization. Then up among the highlands, the invaders who had 
pressed in from the desert, now had turned from the grazing of flocks 
to till the soil and tend the olive and the vine; losing their former 
hardiness, yet they threatened by energy of numbers to overrun the 
plain. In the north, the tribes whose new territories looked off upon 
the sea were learning from their elder neighbors the arts of trade. 
Others, established across the Jordan, seemed to have lapsed from 
their relationship with the sons of Jacob. And in barren regions 
of the border were pitched the goatshair tents of wanderers, still 
strangers in the land. 

These few contrasts in high relief emerge from a vast obscurity. 

134 


THERE WAS NO KING IN ISRAEL 


So, too, the great figures of Israel’s first century in Canaan are not 
many. A moment of special danger in the general turmoil of the 
times called forth a leader to guide or save his clansmen; then the 
tribe went once more its unrecorded way. In the waning memory of 
later generations, some of the early heroes were but the echo of a 
name. There was Shamgar, who smote six hundred of the Philis- 
tines with an ox-goad. Jair was a person of so great worldly dignity 
in his tribe that his thirty sons rode on thirty colts of asses; and like- 
wise Abdon had forty sons and thirty grandsons who attained a sim- 
ilar importance. Hero of a quite different sort was Samson, the 
power of whose fame drew to itself a wealth of stories mythical and 
legendary. The imagination of a lusty race close to the earth, sen- 
sual and crafty, is here unloosed in wild play. The merry rogue, a 
figure of superhuman strength and demonic cunning, was beloved of 
the people for his shrewd recklessness and mad pranks. For in him 
they saw embodied their own qualities, actual or desired, thrown up 
to heroic scale. 

In Jephthah the Gileadite lives a real character of the period. An 
example of the strong man whom the time created for its needs, all 
the incidents of his adventurous career are typical of the rude age in 
which he moved. Born of a concubine, he was driven out by his 
brothers that he should not inherit in his father’s house. Fleeing 
northward beyond the border of Gilead, he gathered about him a 
crew of desperate fellows, himself the chief of the outlaw band. 
Jephthah was a good fighter. And when his tribe was attacked by 
desert raiders, the elders in panic were glad enough to turn to the re- 
doubtable freebooter, whom they had cast forth, as now the very 
man to save them. After some bargaining, they agreed, in reward 
for his help, to make him commander in war and sheikh of the tribe. 
His victory over the Ammonites was not the end of his exploits. 

135 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL ~ 


When the men of haughty Ephraim, jealous again of the success of a 
brother tribe, complained that the Gileadites had not summoned 
them to the war, Jephthah in characteristic high-handed fashion 
fell upon them and put them to the sword. “And it was so, that 
when any of the fugitives of Ephraim said, Let me go over, the men 
of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay; 
then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth; and he said Sibboleth; 
for he could not frame to pronounce it right: then they laid hold on 
him, and slew him at the fords of the Jordan.” 

The heroes whom the historians in a later time termed Judges 
rose, as occasion summoned, to leadership of their own individual 
tribe, or in a larger crisis, to command of a group of tribes, allied for 
the moment in a common enterprise. After the need was passed, 
they left, except in the case of Gideon and his son, no natural suc- 
cessor; and they failed to hold the allied groups in a lasting union. 
There was as yet no king in Israel. 


VIII 
BUILDING THE NATION 


THE descendants of wandering shepherds were now merged with the 
farmer folk of Canaan. Daily toil on the land, unknown to their 
fathers, assured them a comfortable stability, which. also their 
fathers had not known — a life less hardy and heroic, more joyously 
abundant. The returning seasons were celebrated in village festivals, 
of sacred import but merry in the observance; and the year culmi- 
nated in a general pilgrimage of families, bringing their bullock and 
measure of flour and skin of wine, to the central shrine for the wor- 
ship of their god with sacrifice and feasting. Except when armed 
foes threatened, the chief figure in the community was the priest, who 
made known the will of Yahweh; for God, and not a man, was lord of 
the land and the ruler of life. Of political organization there was 
only so much as served to order the daily concerns of each little 
group. Content with the yield of their harvests, the peasant children 
of an adventurous race desired to be left in peace. A people so 
constituted held slight promise of worldly glory. 

The change of condition which followed the settlement of the 
Hebrews on the soil involved not only their acceptance of more com- 
plex social and ritual practices, but also a different communal organ- 
ization. Of itself, Israel had not the skill to complete the process, 
and from within to carry the development to its necessary end. The 
material was there, but it lacked the inner urge to form itself. The 
shaping forces came with pressure from without. 

The Israelites dwelt among the Canaanites in friendliness; but the 
several tribes were not yet in secure possession of their territories. In 

137 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the regions east of the Jordan, nomads raided and ravaged. The 
tribes in central Canaan had to contend with a more formidable 
enemy. About the time that bands of Hebrews, fugitive from Egypt, 
were moving upon Canaan, a strange people from overseas had 
powerfully established themselves in the fertile plain southward 
along the coast. They had come from the island of Crete, scattered 
by the violent overthrow of an amazing civilization that had reached 
its height before the ancestors of Israel emerged from the desert. 
These sea-rovers, though defeated by the might of Egypt under 
Ramses III (about 1180), found lodgment on the shore of Canaan. 
Escaped remnant of ruined splendors, they brought to their new 
home the elaborate forms of their ancient culture. To the last, the 
Philistines remained an alien people. Their confederated cities, pat- 
terned after the states of the old Aigean civilization, presented an 
impregnable front against all assault; secure within their own bor- 
ders, they reached out to control the trade routes of Canaan and to 
extort tribute from weaker peoples. A career of conquest seemed to 
open before them. Heirs to a long tradition of achievement, they 
were immeasurably superior to the simple Israelites, not only in 
political organization but in military competence; their armament of 
bronze and iron gave them an immense advantage over the peasant 
tribesmen of the hills. So the power of the Philistines checked the 
expansion of the Israelites into the plains. More ominous and in- 
stant was its forward thrust, which menaced Israel’s continued 
independence. ‘ 

Early the little tribe of Dan had felt the pressure of its ambitious 
neighbors and was forced to seek other territory for itself in the dis- 
tant north. Memories of the strife between the haughty Philistines 
and the shrewd Israelites were woven into the folk-tales that made 
sport with the exploits of the Danite hero Samson. Now more serious 

138 : 


BUILDING THE NATION 


than such border skirmishes of yore was the march of Philistine 
armies northward against the hill country of Ephraim. The tribes- 
men of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, whose lands were im- 
mediately threatened, moved in force to meet the invaders. Battle 
was joined at Aphek, on the threshold of Benjamin. The Israelites, 
for no chieftain leader arose as of old to deliver them, were defeated. 
Had they also, in the easy abundance of Canaan, forgotten Yahweh 
of Hosts, God of their militant ancestors? Howbeit, in this moment 
of dismay they bethought themselves of the Ark of Yahweh, which in 
sterner but not more perilous times had accompanied their fathers to 
victory. From its resting-place in Shiloh they fetched the sacred 
chest, which should certify the real presence of God in their midst; 
-and with a shout that resounded in the camp of their enemies, they 
carried it into battle. But Yahweh withheld his aid. The Israelites 
were routed utterly. And crowning bitterness, the Ark of God was 
taken. 

The Philistines, following up their triumph, destroyed the ancient 
sanctuary at Shiloh, and stationed a governor in Gibeah of Benjamin. 
Three tribes of Israel, uniting the most numerous and the most war- 
like, were subjected to the yoke of the uncircumcised Philistines. So 
overwhelming was the power of the conquerors that the Hebrews, 
either as deserters or as captives, were impressed into the armies of 
the foe. The import of the disaster all Israel might read. The disci- 
plined aggression of the Philistine was irresistible while the tribes 
remained divided. As the raids of nomads in former days had 
brought Gideon to leadership in Manasseh, as once a hostile league 
of Canaanite princes had inspired Deborah and Barak to rally the 
tribes to war in Yahweh’s name, so now the final compelling neces- 
sity of self-defence called forth a king in Israel and created the 


nation. 


139 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Significantly, the man of the hour rose out of Benjamin. Among 
all the tribes of Israel, from the beginning of their individual history 
in Canaan, Benjamin was preéminent for his fierce prowess. Young- 
est of Jacob’s sons, he was seated between the tribes of the north and 
the increasing clans of Judah on the south. His territory, extending 
from the Jordan to the Philistine border, lay across the highways of 
Canaan. Its rocky tablelands were suited less to nourish its people 
on the soil than to produce a hardy strain of highlanders, who lived 
by the raiding of caravans and the spoils of border war. In the old 
days of the heroes, it was a Benjaminite, Ehud, who delivered his 
kinsmen from Moabite oppression by a deed of reckless horror. 
Times changed. And Benjamin had much to suffer from the Philis- 
tines. Though he submitted perforce to the yoke of this alien people 
of the west, for their armies prevailed against mere bands of undis- 
ciplined mountaineers, the primal venturous spirit of the tribe was 
not wholly broken, but surged again in Saul. 

The immediate occasion of Saul’s elevation to leadership was by 
no means singular in the experience of the tribes. The Ammonites, 
ever hostile to Israel, encamped against the town of Jabesh in Gilead, 
across the Jordan. The citizens were on the point of surrender; but 
when they learned the enemy’s terms — for he threatened to put out 
their right eyes and “lay it for a reproach on all Israel,’’ recognizing 
thus the kinship of the Gileadites with the other tribes — the men 
of Jabesh asked for seven days’ respite that they might summon aid 
from over Jordan. The enemy granted the request, knowing perhaps 
the change that the years had worked upon the temper of Israel, 
weakened further by the Philistine domination. The messengers 
came to Gibeah of Benjamin. Hearing the dread tidings, the people 
lifted up their voice and wept. But none bestirred himself to act. 
It happened then that Saul, the son of a family of wealth, was re- 

140 


BUILDING THE NATION 


turning from the day’s toil, following his oxen. When he was told the 
cause of the outcry, with a fury that was characteristic of the man but 
seemed nothing less than the very spirit of Yahweh rushing mightily 
upon him, Saul hewed his oxen in pieces, and despatched the bleed- 
ing tokens throughout the tribes. On the morrow, so quick was he 
in action, he smote the Ammonites and scattered them. Before the 
crisis, though his family were distinguished in Benjamin, Saul was 
but his father’s son, tilling his fields. His rise to instant leadership 
was abrupt, gained by his impetuous act of sudden resolution. 
Thereupon his victory in war, according to custom, assured him his 
new position. But with this difference, which was now not unknown 
in Israel: on his triumphant return, the people, as the tribesmen of 
Manasseh had sought to do with Gideon, chose Saul to be their 
“king.” 

Saul’s later achievements for Benjamin and for all Israel justified 
the title. The impulsive rally, in which Judah and the Joseph tribes 
joined with Benjamin, for the relief of distant Jabesh, had roused 
feeble Israel to vigorous and concerted action. The victory over the 
Ammonites, though of minor importance in itself, revealed to the 
tribes their latent powers when united; and it may further have sug- 
gested the possibility of an uprising against their Philistine masters 
with some prospect of success. The first stroke in open revolt was 
carried through by Saul’s son Jonathan; in circumstances not re- 
counted, he slew the Philistine governor resident in Saul’s own city 
of Gibeah. When the Philistine armies, to quell the insurrection, 
moved against Benjamin, the people were seized with panic, so far 
forgetting the valor of their fathers, and hid themselves in caves and 
thickets and even in cisterns; some fled across the Jordan to Gilead. 
Immediately following his election as king, Saul had recruited a 
force of three thousand. Now only about six hundred armed men 

141 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


remained to him. But aided by a bold venture of Jonathan, and an 
earthquake, Saul struck confusion into the camp of the Philistines. 
Thereupon the Hebrews serving in the enemy’s army came over to 
Saul; and all the men of Israel who had hid themselves in the hill 
country returned and joined in the pursuit of the discomfited foe. 

Notwithstanding this initial success, “there was sore war against 
the Philistines all the days of Saul.” Furthermore, when Saul had 
taken the kingdom over Israel, he fought against all his enemies on 
every side, Israel’s hereditary foes, against Moab, Ammon, Edom, 
and the Amalekites, and put them to the worse, delivering Israel out 
of the hands of them that despoiled them. 

Saul’s service to Israel, however, was not limited to his exploits in 
war. Out of the momentary coalition of certain tribes for an attack 
upon the Ammonites, he was able, under his single rule as king, to 
shape a more lasting union, which in turn made possible the effective 
true monarchy of David. In this sense, Saul was the founder of the 
nation. The extent to which he consolidated the tribes under his 
acknowledged leadership can only be inferred; for with the entrance 
of David upon the scene, the interest of the narrative shifts at once 
to the fortunes of the younger hero and more glorious king; the fate 
of Saul is but the dark background for the crescent figure of David. 
Saul’s kingdom, based in Benjamin, included the neighboring Joseph 
tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh, and extended across the Jordan to 
Gilead. He brought Judah also within his rule. At the time of 
David's flight from Saul’s jealousy, the men of Keilah, in the centre 
of Judah, proved themselves, as between the popular hero of their 
own tribe and the king, more loyal to Saul. And his authority in 
Caleb, far to the south, was sufficient to make the region unsafe for 
the fugitive David. Apparently he was able also to bestow by royal 
grant fields and vineyards upon his followers in Benjamin. Saul 

142 


BUILDING THE NATION 


reigned as king, therefore, with a power and influence that no other 
leader had yet exercised in Israel. The authority which events placed 
within his grasp bore no relation to the shortlived “kingship” of 
Gideon and Abimelech in Manasseh. It was a new thing among the 
tribes, made possible by the greater exigencies of the later time and 
by the changing conditions which attended the development of 
Israel as a people settled upon the land. 

The king gathered about him a group of able men. His son Jona- 
than, of knightly soul, wrought valiantly for Israel, although his 
friendship with David, in generous disregard of his own succession 
to the throne, seemed to impair his loyalty as son and subject. Saul’s 
cousin Abner, a sturdy fighter, was captain of his host. Greatest of 
all, as it proved, was a handsome youth of Beth-lehem in Judah, 
renowned for his skill with the harp, but soon to evince far weightier 
talents. The court of Saul, however, though sustained by a consid- 
erable personal retinue and a standing army, was of a simplicity be- 
fitting a tribal chieftain rather than a king, — in extreme contrast to 
the secular pomp of the city-princes of Canaan. His sceptre was his 
spear. And he gave audience sitting under a tamarisk tree upon the 
high place of Gibeah, outside the town. Concerning Saul’s organiza- 
ticn of his kingdom as distinct from the old tribal forms, all the nar- 
ratives are silent. 

The kingdom of Israel was rudely shaped under pressure from 
without as a necessity of defence in war. But other forces were at 
work to contribute to the result. Despite Israel’s defection to alien 
gods, the cause of Yahweh was still potent to quicken the ancient 
tribal spirit. It was in the name of Yahweh that the prophetess 
Deborah had summoned the tribes to war against the league of 
Canaanite princes; and the great victory at the torrent Kishon was 
due, as it seemed, to his intervention. If afterwards Yahweh was 

143 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


forgotten in the seductive cult of the baals, the crushing defeat at 
Aphek, perhaps half a century later, and the loss of the Ark to the 
uncircumcised Philistines, issued in a new awakening. Bands of en- 
thusiasts, with wild music and frenzied dances, trooped through the 
countryside, calling the people back to the single ardent worship of 
Yahweh. These prophets were fired with zeal for the ancestral God 
of battles, and they kindled the people with a fervor of warlike em- 
prise. Religion and tribal welfare were one, such welfare as only 
victory in war could assure. Saul himself succumbed to the conta- 
gion of their incitements, so that the saying was current in Israel, 
“Is Saul also among the prophets?”’ The ecstatics were distinctly of 
the people and close to them. Because of their popular influence, 
they rendered a real service in bringing the tribes back to their old 
militant faith in the God of hosts, and rousing them to fight for their 
independence as a nation. 

The choosing of Saul to be king in Israel was not the act of a few, 
high placed in authority; rather, he was lifted on the crest of a popu- 
lar movement. A leader rising to the crisis of a moment was contin- 
ued in his leadership under a new title conferred by the general voice, 
responding to the increasing needs of the time. When the victorious 
warrior was consecrated as king, it was amid the rejoicing of all the 
people. In the making of Israel there were, as always in history, 
outstanding figures to guide events toward definitely practical con- 
clusions. But the people themselves shared in the movements which 
were moulding their future. When Saul placed David in command of 
his army, the narrative records that it was good in the sight of the 
people and in the sight of Saul’s servants. The king was not an 
autocrat, but with due reference to public opinion, he had to reckon 
with the popular will. Unlike the city-states of Canaan, unlike the 
empires of Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria, the little Israelite nation 

144 


BUILDING THE NATION 


was essentially democratic. It suited the spirit of tribal organization 
to allow all the heads of families a voice in the councils of the clan; 
and for the most part throughout the history of the kingdom, the 
leaders of the nation measured their influence, not by the degree of 
arbitrary power they exercised, but by the accord they were able to 
persuade from the whole people. 

In response to impulse, as it seemed, Saul performed the sudden 
act whose consequences raised him to the kingship. But the oldest 
strand of narrative recounts that he had already been forewarned of 
the high destiny awaiting him. At Ramah, among the hills westward 
of Gibeah, dwelt Samuel, of some repute in the country round about 
as a seer and ‘“‘man of God.” What actual part Samuel had in shap- 
ing the events of this critical period is obscure, but doubtless it was 
considerable. Later historians in retrospect, bestowing upon him the 
dignity of a judge in Israel and the vocation of a prophet, added 
enormously to the sum of his achievements for the nation. The oldest 
narrative recites quite simply that Samuel by virtue of his powers as 
a seer foretold to Saul his elevation, and he anointed him to be king. 
Charmingly in the manner of the popular tale, it is related how Saul 
went out to seek his father’s asses and found a royal crown. The 
spirit of romance, creative and ever-young, contrived the story, but 
in its color and figured detail is mirrored the life of Israel as it was in 
the ancient days. 

Kish was a prosperous husbandman of Benjamin. Upon a time it 
fell out that his asses went astray; wherefore he sent forth his son 
Saul, attended by a servant, to seek them. Passing through all the 
countryside, yet in three days they found them not. 

When they were come to the land of Zuph, Saul said to his servant 
that was with him, Come and let us return; lest my father leave car- 
ing for the asses, and take thought for us. And he said unto him, Be- 

145 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


hold now, there is in this city a man of God, and he is a man that is 
held in honor; all that he saith cometh surely to pass: now let us go 
thither; peradventure he can tell us concerning our journey whereon 
we go. Then said Saul to his servant, But, behold, if we go, what 
shall we bring the man? for the bread is spent in our vessels, and 
there is not a present to bring to the man of God: what have we? 
And the servant answered Saul again, and said, Behold, I have in my 
hand the fourth part of a shekel of silver: that will I give to the man 
of God, to tell us our way. Then said Saul to his servant, Well said; 
come, let us go. So they went unto the city where the man of God 
was. 

As they went up the ascent to the city, they found young maidens 
going out to draw water, and said unto them, Is the seer here? And 
they answered them, and said, He is; behold, he is before thee: make 
haste now, for he is come to-day into the city; for the people have a 
sacrifice to-day in the high place: as soon as ye be come into the city, 
ye shall straightway. find him, before he go up to the high place to 
eat: for the people will not eat until he come, because he doth bless 
the sacrifice; and afterwards they eat that be bidden. Now therefore 
get you up; for at this time ye shall find him. And they went up to 
the city; and as they came within the city, behold, Samuel came out 
toward them, for to go up to the high place. 

Then Saul drew near to Samuel in the gate, and said, Tell me, I 
pray thee, where the seer’s house is. And Samuel answered Saul, and 
said, I am the seer; go up before me unto the high place, for ye shall 
eat with me to-day: and in the morning I will let thee go, and will 
tell thee all that is within thine heart. 


: Thereupon Samuel bids Saul to the feast of the sacrifice and be- 
stows on him the chief portion. Returning from the high place, they 
lodge together that night upon the housetop. Early the morrow 
morn, Samuel sets his guest upon his way, having told him that the 
asses were found and that great things should befall him. Before they 
part, the seer anoints Saul in token of his consecration as king. 


The familiar and the marvellous blend into a single texture. Woven 
146 


BUILDING THE NATION 


of the stuff of imagination and of everyday life, the narrative tells 
in its homely way how Saul through the prescience of the seer was 
indicated as the chosen of Yahweh, and received at his hand the sign 
of divine appointment. No doubt Samuel, devoted servant of Yah- 
weh, was keenly alive to the needs of Israel, and with his gift of in- 
sight was quick to recognize in the stalwart impetuous Saul the man 
notably qualified to unite the tribes for self-defence. So, preémi- 
nent in his community as a man of God, Samuel lent his personal 
support and prestige to the popular movement that gave Israel a 
king. 

As the years brought new problems and complexities to the king, 
who must shape his course without the guidance of precedent, Saul 
came into serious conflict with the priestly authority, dominant 
before ever there was a king in Israel. Therewith his influence, al- 
ready shaken by the growing popularity of David, began to wane. 
Writers in a much later age, whose purpose was to magnify the im- 
portance of the official representatives of Yahweh, attributed to 
Samuel alone the preponderant part in the choice and consecration 
of Saul; and they proceed to recount the king’s quarrels with Samuel, 
whom they figure as supreme, the consequent rejection of Saul by 
Yahweh, and his ultimate ruin. These instances may typify con- 
ditions afterwards between Israel’s kings and the ministers of 
Yahweh; for as the kingship broadened its functions, it tended to 
encroach upon the authority of the priesthood. 

More trustworthy is the old account of Saul’s vengeance on the 
priests of Nob, the central sanctuary of the little kingdom., not far 
from Saul’s residence town of Gibeah. David, fleeing from the king, 
had come to Nob, and there he was succored by the chief priest, who 
supplied him with bread from off the altar, and a sword. When Saul 
learned of the act, which he chose to regard as treason, he called the 

147. 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


entire company of priests before him, as he held court at the high 
place of Gibeah. On the charge that they had given aid and comfort 
to his enemy, Saul ordered his body-guard to slay the priests. “But 
the servants of the king would not put forth their hand to fall upon 
the priests of Yahweh.’ The awe that Yahweh’s holy ones inspired 
was more potent than the king’s command. It was an Edomite, 
Doeg by name, the chief of Saul’s herdsmen, who executed the dire 
behest. The villain had seen David at the sanctuary of Nob, and had 
betrayed him to his master. At a word from the king, Doeg turned 
and fell upon the priests, and slew that day forescore and five. And 
Nob and every living thing therein he smote with the edge of the 
sword. From the stories that gathered about Saul’s conflict with 
the priests, it may be inferred that during his reign, authority was 
divided between the old priesthood and the new king. The balance 
inclined toward the king to the extent that force was on his side. 
The tentative, loose union of certain of the tribes under the first 
“king of Israel’? was based in the person of Saul as their leader in 
war. Apart from the bond of kinship and their common worship of 
Yahweh, all the conditions of life in Canaan, the dispersion of the 
tribes over the land, their distinctive local interests, their fusion with 
diverse groups of Canaanites, made for separateness. The sense of in- 
tertribal community was less strong than individual tribal jealousy. 
So deep-rooted were the tendencies to division that on the death of 
Solomon, less than a century after Saul, the nation that David had 
raised to greatness broke again in twain, disparting into the rival 
kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Since each tribe, from the beginning, 
had its “elders of the people,” able to decree justice but without 
power to enforce it, so a centralized general government over a larger 
unit could hardly evolve of itself from the traditional forms of tribal 
organization. As to the practical advantages of kingship for strength 
148 


BUILDING THE NATION 


in war and the development of material prosperity, the Israelites had 
before them the example of all other nations. But the constraint of 
an inclusive single authority was foreign to their temper. The in- 
stinctive opposition of the tribes to royalty finds vivid expression in 
Jotham’s fable (Jud. 9 8-15), and in the address attributed to Samuel 
as a revelation from Yahweh, though in reality the bitter fruit of later 
experience (1 Sam. 8 11-18). Kingship implied subjection, the submis- 
sion of the individual to one executive will, empowered to enforce 
obedience. The Israelite, descended from untamed nomads, did not 
willingly surrender his freedom of action. 

To fuse these resistive and conflicting elements within and among 
the tribes, and weld them into a nation, was not an easy task; and 
Saul succeeded only in part. The mettlesome warrior-king, whose 
badge of office was his spear, proved himself a sufficient leader of his 
people against a foreign enemy; but a more complex problem awaited 
him at home, beyond his power to solve. The skill was denied him, 
out of the intractable material which necessity had thrust into his 
hands, to fashion a new structure fitted to endure. Untried, a pio- 
neer, and having to create, Saul failed to wrest from the turmoil of 
his years the plenary power that should be vested in a king; and the 
kingdom, whose foundation was laid in a need of which he was but the 
instrument, he was unable to organize and consolidate. His failure 
was due in part to his personal misfortunes. The gathering melan- 
choly that obscured his vision likewise unnerved his arm. Moreover, 
he had reason to fear the luminous young Judahite, once his trusted 
armor-bearer, now his declared rival in popular favor and support; 
for as the star of David rose to increasing brilliance, the lesser light of 
Saul waned steadily to extinction. The work that Israel’s first king 
began but could not complete required for its accomplishment the 
genius of one greater than Saul. 

149 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Conditions of life in Israel as Saul grappled with them were still 
in flux. Old forms were proving inadequate; a new order awaited 
the master hand. Shepherds and farmers occupied highlands and 
plains; Israelites were merging with Canaanites, but they had not yet 
penetrated the larger cities, centres of industry and trade. On the 
edges hovered restive fellows, unable or unwilling to make a place for 
themselves in the existing confusion. Society was in transition; and 
Saul’s talents as an administrator were not sufficient to bring the 
process to completion. Precisely these unstable conditions, however, 
furnished David material and scope for the exercise of his surpassing 
gifts. 

The tragic career of Saul sets in sharp relief the checkered rise to 
fame and power of the young adventurer, with whom the king’s own 
fate was linked disastrously. The favorite of fortune, who risks all and 
wins all, David is supremely a hero of romance. But equally in fact 
he was the consummate figure of his age. The story of David, best 
loved, most glorious of Israel’s worthies, is one of the great achieve- 
ments of Hebrew narrative art. Compound of legend and history in 
varying measure, it is wrought with all the dramatic skill, the power 
of characterization, the sense for movement and for the value of con- 
trast, that the old story-tellers knew so well how to use. Shot 
through with rude humor, terrible passions, fine sentiment, and piety, 
it weaves its tissue out of the very fibre of the people. And in the per- 
son of David himself was embodied at that moment the spirit of his 
race, 

The shepherd lad, the slayer of the Philistine giant, the pet of roy- 
alty, the invincible warrior outtopping the king himself, and the con- 
queror of all hearts, — it is a figure moulded of the plastic stuff of pop- 
ular imagining. No less versatile, but of sterner substance, was the 
David of history. His facility in music, as it happened, brought him 

150 


BUILDING THE NATION 


a summons to the king. Straightway he won the royal favor, and 
therewith swift advancement, for Saul made the youth his armor- 
bearer, then captain of a thousand, then his son-in-law. David’s suc- 
cess in war against the Philistines worked to his own hurt, for his fast- 
growing repute among the people roused the quick jealousy, embit- 
tered by malign suspicion, of the mercurial king. As Saul’s title to 
the kingship rested in his personal strength and was rather the gift of 
the people than an inherited or inalienable right, he saw in David a 
dangerous rival, who might easily jeopardize his uncertain throne. 
Convinced by more than one token that Saul meant him serious 
harm, David fled the court, in effect an outlaw, fighting now for his 
own hand. 

David turned southward to his home country. There he was 
joined by all his immediate kinsmen. His break with the king con- 
cerned more than his individual relation to Saul; it took on the im- 
portance of a tribal matter, one clan arraying itself against another. 
To avert Saul’s vengeance which might be directed against all his 
house, he removed his father and mother to Mizpah in Moab, and 
placed them under the pfotection of the Moabite king. In the wilder- 
ness of Judah, David mustered a company of malcontents to the 
number of four hundred. These were a formidable force, but not his 
sole reliance. Abiathar, a priest of Nob, had escaped the massacre of 
his fellows by Saul, and he fled to David, bringing with him the in- 
strument of the sacred lot. It was a fortunate stroke for David that 
he was able to attach Abiathar to his cause: he secured thereby re- 
course to the oracle of Yahweh, which he often consulted in his subse- 
quent undertakings; furthermore, the presence of the priest in a sense 
legitimized his position as a rebel against the king, and it may have 
brought him some measure of support from those who still recognized 
the influence of the priest as dominant. David had with him also the 

151 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


prophet Gad. In thus rallying to his person many different elements 
in the unstable kingdom, David made himself a menacing rival of 
Saul for the place of chief authority which might yet be within the 
power of the people to bestow. 

The rebel maintained his band of outlaws in the desolate Judean 
country by raiding and petty war. But his footing was precarious. 
It was told him that the Philistines were fighting against Keilah and 
robbing the threshing floors. Forthwith, having received a favorable 
response from the oracle, he proposed an attack. His men objected, 
“Behold, we are afraid here in Judah: how much more then if we go 
to Keilah against the armies of the Philistines!” Between certainty of 
starvation in the wilderness and the hazard of death in battle there 
seemed little to choose. Assured a second time by the oracle, David 
fell upon the Philistines, delivered the city, whose inhabitants were 
of his own kin, and enriched himself with the plunder of the enemy. 
But other means of subsistence were presented on occasion. 

A typical instance of the freebooter’s life, vividly individualized in 
narration, was David’s dealings with the wealthy ranchman Nabal, 
the Calebite. At the season of sheep-shearifig, David officiously as- 
sumed protection of the workers, himself refraining from theft and 
guarding them from other raiders. For this volunteer service David 
demanded compensation, which the owner, a churlish person besides, 
naturally refused. ‘Who is this David? and who is the son of Jesse? 
there be many servants nowadays that break away every man from 
his master. Shall I then take my bread and my wine and my flesh 
that I have killed for my shearers, and give it unto men of whom I 
know not whence they be?” Evidently malcontents, such as David 
had recruited, were numerous in the land. Nabal’s wife Abigail was 
more politic. Learning from one of her husband’s men what had hap- 


pened, she shrewdly, as Jacob once had sought to propitiate Esau, 
152 


BUILDING THE NATION 


despatched a handsome offering to the peremptory outlaw — two 
hundred loaves, two skins of wine, two sheep ready dressed, five 
measures of parched grain, a hundred clusters of raisins, and two 
hundred cakes of figs. Then she set forth to meet David, even now 
coming down from his covert in the hills; and in an exchange of 
courtesies, a masterpiece of old Israelite ceremonious address, she 
was able to mollify his terrible anger. For girding on his sword, as 
did his men also, David had sworn to avenge the affront by Nabal 
which his own conduct had provoked. “God do so unto the enemies 
of David, and more also, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the 
morning light so much as one man child!” But the tense will of the 
quarrelsome chieftain relaxed in the glow of a woman’s look. Now 
Nabal, satisfied that his rebuff had disposed of the blackmailer, had 
given himself over to the revelry appropriate to the festival of sheep- 
shearing, and was feasting like a king; his “heart was merry within 
him, for he was very drunken.” Not until the next morning, when 
the wine was gone out of him, did Abigail inform her husband con- 
cerning her manceuvre; “and his heart died within him, and he be- 
came as a stone.’ About ten days later Nabal died. David took the 
comely widow, as clever as she was rich, to wife; and by this alliance, 
he won for his cause the support of the powerful clan of Caleb. 
Meanwhile all attempts of the king in person to capture David ) 
proved futile, for the caves and fastnesses of the wilderness offered 
the best of cover for the outlaw band. But the continued pursuit by 
Saul through territory whose inhabitants in loyalty to the king were 
ready to betray the fugitive, compelled David as a last desperate 
step to take refuge with the Philistines. As captain of a guerilla 
force which now numbered six hundred men expert in mountain 
fighting and swift forays, the Judahite rebel found welcome among 


Israel’s hereditary enemies, who had need also to protect their bor- 
153 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL” 


ders against raiding tribes. Achish, king of Gath, in whose service 
David placed himself with his entire company, assigned him for 
a residence the town of Ziklag, far south in Philistine territory. 
From here David made war on tribes hostile to Israel, pretending be- 
fore the king, however, that he was fighting against his own people. 
He brought back much booty of cattle and stuff, but slew all the men 
and women, that no one might betray his double-dealing to his Phil- 
istine lord. And Achish believed David, saying, “He hath made his 
people Israel utterly to abhor him; therefore he shall be my servant 
forever.”’ Though he secured the confidence of his master, the other 
Philistine princes distrusted the fidelity of the Hebrew vassal; and 
when their armies moved out to attack Israel, David, who was ac- 
companying Achish, was compelled to return to Ziklag. Their sus- 
picions were not unfounded. For instead of breaking with his kins- 
men of Judah, David had striven to hold their good-will, protecting 
them from their enemies and bestowing on them presents from the 
booty which he took in his raids. Whether or not he was aiming im- 
mediately at the kingship, it was his consistent policy, though an 
outlaw over against the Benjaminite government of Saul, to prove 
himself the strong friend of Judah. His foresight was justified in the 
event. 


David had no part in the battle in which Saul met his end. The 
manner of the king’s death accorded with his service to Israel and 
symbolized his life of high expectancies whose issue was frustration. 
Amidst the ruin that swept away his army and bereaved him of three 
sons, Saul perished by his own hand in a losing fight with the Philis- 
tines. Not content with simple triumph, the victors despoiled and 
mutilated the fallen king, and hung his headless body on the walls 
of Beth-shan, at the Benjaminite frontier. But in the hour of su- 

154 


BUILDING THE NATION 


preme humiliation, Saul was lovingly remembered. The men of Ja- 
besh in distant Gilead, whom he had valorously delivered in the 
early days, recovered the bodies of Saul and his sons and buried them 
with due honor under a sacred tree by their city. In spite of fatal 
defects of nature and the blows of evil fortune, Saul won the devotion 
of his people. David, fugitive, active rebel, and aspirant for the 
throne, could not renounce his loyalty to the king and his affection 
for the man. When chance had delivered into his power the royal 
pursuer who sought his life, David forbore to lay his hand on Yah- 
weh’s anointed (1 Sam. 26 and 24). At the moment his own ascend- 
ance seemed assured by the king’s death, he thought only of the 
love he had to Saul; in hot anger he smote the messenger, who in 
hope of reward brought to David the king’s crown and bracelet, with 
the tidings that he had himself given the death stroke. David with 
all his men mourned for Saul; and he uttered the lament, worthy 
alike of the singer and of the hero whose passing it commemorates: 

Thy glory, O Israel, is slain upon thy high places! 

How are the mighty fallen! 

The task which the needs of the time laid upon Saul exceeded his 
powers. He did not lack bravery or personal force; but his enthu- 
siasm was not matched by ability to give his aspirations practical 
effect. Endowed with qualities of greatness, he failed of success. 
Against the dark confusion of his age, the embodiment of high hopes 
defeated, Saul stands out a figure of tragic grandeur, a symbol of 
Israel itself. 


IX 
HIGH NOON 


THE death of Saul left Israel at a parting of the ways. Manifestly 
the old organization of the tribes no longer sufficed in new condi- 
tions. Their integrity as a people threatened by absorption among 
the Canaanites, such independence as the more powerful tribes had 
won for themselves was menaced by the conquering advance of the 
Philistines. Yet the sense of tribal individuality was still acute, 
rendering difficult any practical union of rival groups. Could Israel, 
tenacious of ancestral habit, adapt itself to a form of control which 
was contrary to its disposition and customary manner of life? 
Saul’s kingdom, though far exceeding in scope the authority of a 
tribal chieftain, was limited in extent and weakly held; and his ven- 
ture ended in defeat. But his example showed the necessity as well 
as the advantages of kingship. Now to complete Saul’s work, there 
was need of a shaping mind and a strong hand. The range of David 
as rebel and free lance had been made possible by the prevailing dis- 
order; and the support he drew to his cause was a sign of the popular 
unrest. Saul was.unable to coerce conditions, even if he saw the end 
to be achieved; he was but king in name. David made himself king 
in fact; and the resistive elements which eluded Saul’s grasp yielded 
to his mastery. It was a turning point in the development of Israel 
that David proved to be the strong man whom the times required. 
David was endowed superlatively with all the needful qualities of 
leadership. Magnetic, he was a born ruler of men, compelling to him: 
self their devoted enthusiasm. Great in his faults as in his virtues, he 
was altogether human and engaging. At once shrewdly selfish and 
156 


HIGH NOON 


generous-hearted, he was designing even in his magnanimity. 
Worldly in his ambitions, he was devout after the fashion of his time; 
and he knew besides how to turn religion to practical ends. Poet and 
musician, he was no less a hardy fighter, the bravest among the 
people. Taking quick advantage of every occasion, he was also able 
to create opportunity; that he could give fullest scope to his powers 
was due to his imaginative vision and dominating will. The daring, 
clever adventurer proved himself to be a far-sighted and constructive 
statesman. In David was embodied the utmost of political compe- 
tence of which Israel was ever capable. His rearing of the kingdom 
and his administering of it exemplified the highest that Israel could 
accomplish of success as a nation among the nations. 


Upon the death of Saul, the little kingdom which he had assembled 
loosely fell apart. Such authority as the king was able to bequeath 
passed to his weakling son, Ishbaal. Attended by the remnants of 
the Israelite army, Ishbaal took refuge in Gilead, for the old territory 
of Benjamin had come into possession of the Philistine conquerors. 
At Mahanaim across the Jordan, Abner, captain of the host and still 
faithful to the house of Saul, proclaimed Ishbaal king over Gilead, 
Asher, Jezreel, Ephraim, and Benjamin — that is, all Israel; only the 
house of Judah followed David. But it was an empty title. The 
Philistine occupation of Benjamin had thrust a wedge between north 
and south; and Judah, ever separate in feeling from the tribes of Is- 
rael, broke away from its lax union with the realm of Saul. In the 
confusion that followed the ruin of the Benjaminite king, David was 
able to return to his home country; and quitting the Philistine serv- 
ice, the powerful outlaw captain with his entire company established 
his residence at Hebron. “And the men of Judah came, and there 
they anointed David king over the house of Judah.” As in the case 

157 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


of Saul, election proceeded from the people; they chose from among 
themselves the warrior who had shown by his personal courage and 
skill the greatest capacity for leadership in arms. 

The new kingdom was a rival kingdom. Since the entrance of all 
the Hebrew clans into Canaan, the dominant rdle among them had 
fallen always to one or another of the northern tribes. To them, the 
nucleus of the later nation, had been entrusted in the wilderness the 
secret of Yahweh, in its pristine simplicity and virtue. Among these 
tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh, as the largest and most favored of 
all, exercised the greatest influence. At one crisis in their common 
fortunes, responding to the summons of the Ephraimite prophetess 
Deborah, it was the little tribe of Naphtali that took the lead. And 
latest of their heroes was a man of Benjamin, their first king. But 
Judah, with its affiliated clans of the southern desert, had pressed 
into Canaan along a different way; there separated from the Israelite 
tribes by a chain of Canaanite cities, it lived a life apart. Only with 
the rise of David was Judah able to challenge the predominance of 
the north. Now as between Judah and Benjamin in their preten- 
sions to the rule over Israel, legitimacy was on the side of Ishbaal, 
rightful heir to the kingdom founded by his father, Saul. 

Though David was chosen by his clansmen king of Judah with 
due ceremony, his sole reliance, if his authority were questioned, was 
his personal following of seasoned fighters. In order further to secure 
his position, he sought to conciliate the adherents of the Benjaminite 
kingdom. With a finesse that marked all his handling of men, he 
sent messengers to the people of Jabesh in Gilead, ever deeply and 
at the last so touchingly loyal to Saul, ostensibly to thank them for 
their devoted service to the dead king. But David took occasion 
also to remind them that Saul was indeed dead, and that the men of 
Judah had anointed himself to be king — able therefore to do well by 

158 


HIGH NOON 


them, and so disposed. It may be inferred that David calculated the 
impression which this notable example of his good intentions might 
make on the northern tribes. 
Diplomacy alone, however, was not enough to win over the im- 
mediate supporters of Ishbaal; and matters came to an open break. 
In the armed conflict that ensued, the Judahites were victorious. 
During the fight, Abner, though reluctantly, struck down the brother 
of David’s captain Joab, and thus drew upon himself blood-guiltiness, 
which he was afterwards to requite with his own life. At this junc- 
ture Abner stands out as the commanding figure on the Israelite side. 
Veteran warrior and practical man, he was both king-maker and the 
power behind Ishbaal’s uncertain throne. A quarrel with his liege, 
the shadow king, concerning a concubine of Saul, threw him into 
David’s camp. The disaffection of Abner was a serious blow to Ish- 
baal; for such was his influence in the northern kingdom that he was 
able to persuade the elders of Israel with him to acknowledge David’s 
sovereignty. But the move cost him dearly. In Hebron, where the 
grizzled soldier, bearing the proffered fealty of Israel, was welcomed 
with ceremonious feasting by the Judahite king, he was murdered 
in the gate by Joab, avenging a brother’s blood. Abner’s taking-off 
struck panic into the Benjaminite court. It was manifest the tide 
had set toward David and was flowing irresistibly. In the utter con- 
fusion beyond Jordan, two captains of the royal guerilla bands, hop- 
ing to catch step with the winning cause, assassinated Ishbaal and 
brought his head to the rival king in Hebron. The reward of their 
treachery and violence was instant death, ordered by the right- 
eously incensed David. The king decreed a general mourning for 
Abner, with rending of clothes and girding on of sackcloth. In per- 
son David followed the bier, chanting a lament of his own poetic 
devising; and he fasted all day till sundown. “And all the people 
159 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


took notice of it; and it pleased them. ...So all the people and all 
Israel understood that day that it was not of the king to slay Abner.” 
With equal piety David caused the head of Ishbaal to be buried in 
Abner’s grave in Hebron. Thus in the most public and impressive 
manner, the king disclaimed all responsibility for the death of Abner 
and of Ishbaal. The anointed of Yahweh should be clear of all sus- 
picion, though the favorite of fortune need not hesitate to profit by 
events which redounded so vastly to his advantage. 

The episodes thus summed up in the acts of a few leading person- 
ages doubtless spanned a long period of civil war, accented by in- 
dividual blood-feuds and ruthless murders. The turmoil of the time 
was part cause and part effect of the transition through which Israel 
was passing. The king had still to win the power that should belong 
to royalty. His authority had not yet superseded the law of tribal 
custom; and decision affecting the general welfare was still referred 
to the elders of the people. Apparently no taxes were levied upon 
the group to maintain the royal establishment, simple as it was; the 
necessary revenues of the government were supplied from the booty 
taken in raids: this much of old tribal practice was not forgotten. 
So Ishbaal had his guerilla bands; and the servants of David brought 
in great spoils from their forays. The mainstay of the throne was the 
body of armed troops, attached to the person of the king. Their 
leaders exercised a practical control that might equal the authority 
of the king himself, who was therefore dependent on their support. 
Without Abner, his captain of the host, Ishbaal was altogether help- 
less. Even David was forced to complain: “I am this day weak, 
though anointed king; and these men the sons of Zeruiah [Joab and 
his brother, David’s officers] are too hard for me.’ Otherwise, the 
king’s establishment was modest in the extreme. Ishbaal’s guardian 
of his door was a woman; and she was engaged while on duty, per- 

160 


HIGH NOON 


haps as a function of her office, in cleaning wheat. Saul, though sur- 
passing the tribal chieftains in the extent of his rule, hardly exceeded 
them in dignity. And David at Hebron achieved little more of 
kingly estate. In the stress of constant warfare with the partisans of 
Saul’s house and with the Philistines, he seems to have attempted no 
thorough-going organization of his Judahite kingdom. His work for 
all Israel lay before him. 


The death of Abner and of Ishbaal left the northern kingdom 
wholly without leadership or support. The events which followed 
thereupon were momentous in the result, though their precise order 
is uncertain. David was chosen king of all Israel. He beat back the 
Philistines. He captured the city of Jerusalem and made it the cap- 
ital of the nation. Whatever the relation among them, these three 
manceuvres worked together to lift Israel to the height of its worldly 
power. 

It is written in the Hebrew narrative: “All the elders of Israel 
came to the king to Hebron; and king David made a covenant with 
them in Hebron before Yahweh: and they anointed David king over 
Israel.’’ The brevity of the notice withholds the full import of the 
action it records. In a small land on the frontiers of two empires, 
the elders of a few insignificant tribes gathered to choose a king by 
a method of their own. Kingship as Israel fashioned it was unique 
among contemporary nations. In Egypt and Babylonia, the origin 
of the royal office and attributes receded into the unknown past; by 
continuous increase of his prerogatives from time immemorial, the 
monarch had become the vicegerent of deity itself and in his own 
person divine. Now with the simple tribes of Israel, kingship was a 
new institution, wrought out of immediately pressing needs. Mod- 
elled upon a form ready to their hand, it differed from its world-old 

161 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


prototype in that it was a creation from below, proceeding from the 
people. As the narrative here declares, it lay within the power of the 
elders to delegate their authority to one whom they raised up to be 
king over them by their own free act and choice. Thus the mon- 
archy received its sanction by mutual consent; and the relations be- 
tween king and people were defined by a covenant affirming their 
reciprocal rights and obligations. Throughout the nation’s history, 
the king, though sacrosanct as Yahweh’s anointed, never became in 
the traditional absolute sense divine. He reigned by the favor of 
Yahweh and the people’s will. Even Solomon’s arbitrary rule, which 
aimed to rival the despotism of imperial potentates, could not wrest 
from the people their right to ratify the accession to the throne. At 
his death, “all Israel’? assembled to make his son Rehoboam king; 
and the negotiations that followed left an entire freedom of action 
with the people. The manner of David’s election to the kingship 
and the covenant which sanctioned it were profoundly characteristic 
of the democratic temper that gave direction to Israel’s development 
as a nation. 

David’s authority now far surpassed the limited sway of Saul. He 
further consolidated his kingdom by centralizing the government in 
a city-capital. The ancient Canaanite fortress of Jerusalem, a mo- 
ment of whose long history was recorded in the Amarna letters, had 
maintained itself against the Israelite invasion for two hundred 
years. So great was its natural strength, the saying was current that 
the lame and the blind sufficed to defend it. Nevertheless, David 
succeeded in capturing the city, whether by stratagem or superior 
force, by siege or direct assault, a considerable military feat. Once 
in possession, David chose the citadel crowning one of its hills as his 
residence. His wisdom was abundantly justified. For the importance 
of Jerusalem to his kingdom, and as it proved, in the whole history 

162 


HIGH NOON 


of the Hebrew people, was immense. A natural fortress posted in the 
centre of Canaan, the city commanded the great highways of trade 
and conquest northward or southward, and also the east and west 
road from Joppa to Jericho. Standing midway between the northern 
and the southern Hebrew groups in neutral territory which had for- 
merly divided them, it was well suited to become the capital of the 
united Israelite and Judahite kingdom, without jealousy on either 
side; and as it had no associations or traditions pertaining to any of 
the tribes, it was the more easily identified with the dynasty and the 
nation that David was in process of creating. Moreover, Jerusalem 
provided what before the tribes had lacked, a centre which gathered 
to itself all activities of national concern. From here radiated the 
strands of administrative control, and here was the core of a new so- 
cial organization. The practical union of all the tribes, the goal to- 
ward which they had been striving from the troubled days of the 
Judges, was achieved. The nation had its rallying-point in the cap- 
ital at Jerusalem. 

Hitherto a centre of communal interest within each little group 
had been the sanctuary, where all the people met for worship with 
sacrifice and general feasting. Now the political ties that David was 
weaving through the nation were as yet less compelling than the 
primal bond of religion. To assure the prestige of the new capital, it 
was necessary to link it up with old associations and the sentiment of 
custom. The royal residence must have its sanctuary. A master- 
stroke of policy was David’s resolve to install at Jerusalem the Ark 
of Yahweh, God of hosts. In all the varied fortunes of the tribes, no 
object related with their common worship was so venerable. Fash- 
ioned, so tradition told, in the wilderness, it had led the fathers tri- 
umphantly into the promised land. Calamity, indeed, had befallen 
it, and of late years the Ark had suffered neglect. In the battle and 

163 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


rout at Aphek, it was lost to the victorious Philistines. But it brought 
disaster to its captors, and they despatched it from their borders, 
though not beyond their control. Within Canaanite territory not 
far from Jerusalem, for a generation it had lain inaccessible. David’s 
victories over the Philistines restored the Ark to Israel. Thereupon 
to draw it forth from its eclipse was to add the lustre of its imme- 
morial sanctity and virtue to the new kingdom. 

With the utmost possible impressiveness, attended by the army 
and the people, David went to fetch the shrine from its resting-place 
and bring it up to Jerusalem. Laying the hallowed chest with due 
ceremony upon a new cart drawn by oxen, the company set forward 
in festal procession to the beat of tumultuous music of all manner of 
instruments. But Yahweh interposed. Along the rock-strewn way 
the oxen stumbled. One of the drivers, putting out his hand to steady 
the sacred burden, was struck dead. So the Ark had lost nothing of 
its terrible holiness, its power to harm. Nor its power to bless as 
well. For when David, warned by this manifestation of Yahweh’s 
displeasure, broke off his undertaking and left the Ark in the house 
of Obed-edom, a Philistine residing in Jerusalem, then Yahweh 
blessed Obed-edom and all his house. After three months, hearing of 
the prosperity that the Ark had brought to the Philistine sojourner, 
David was encouraged to renew the fateful enterprise. Once more, 
with the Ark borne on men’s shoulders, the procession moved up the 
winding rough ascent to the citadel joyously, with shouting and the 
sound of trumpets; and the king himself, clad only with a linen apron, 
danced before Yahweh with all his might. Arrived at the summit, 
where the Ark was bestowed within the tent prepared for it, David 
offered sacrifices and blessed the people in the name of Yahweh of 
hosts; and with regal bounty he dealt out largesses of bread, cakes, 


and wine to all the multitude, both men and women. 
164. 


HIGH NOON 


The king was still close to the people. The bringing up of the Ark 
to furnish forth the royal sanctuary was a matter of general popular 
concern. The bearing of the shrine was entrusted, not, as its sacred- 
ness would seem to have required, to the priests, but to David’s per- 
sonal followers, his “chosen men”’; and all the people shared in the 
ceremonies, not as mere onlookers but with active collaboration. 
David’s own part is especially noteworthy. As leader of the people 
he directed the proceeding, as chief among them he offered sacrifice, 
as king over them he dispensed bounty; but as participant in the 
ecstatic abandon of rejoicing, he was one with them. The figure of 
the half-naked warrior, whirling and leaping in a frenzy of enthu- 
siasm before the Ark in its progress through the thronging streets, 
had little of traditional kingly dignity. David’s wife, peering down 
through her lattice upon the mad scene, furnished the comment 
of one detached from its excitements— who had, besides, as the 
daughter of the Benjaminite Saul, no sympathy with the politic de- 
signs of the Judahite hero and favorite. ‘How glorious was the king 
of Israel to-day, who uncovered himself to-day in the eyes of the 
handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly 
uncovereth himself!’’ At this moment Israel was still true to an- 
cestral type. The Ark was the palladium of fighting tribes. The 
properties attaching to it were the conceptions of a primitive race, 
who saw in the sacred chest the actual and present power of a god of 
the hosts of war. David, foremost among the people but not remote 
from them, was able to shape the old material to new ends. In re- 
covering the Ark, he stirred the deepest instincts of the tribes, re- 
viving ancient memories of triumphs. By exalting it at the capital 
to a position of supremacy equalling its former glories, he captured 
the quick imagination of the people, and by his demeanor as still one 
of them, he gained their affection for the kingdom. 

165 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


At Jerusalem, David organized his government. Somewhat of the 
democratic spirit of the tribal system was carried over into the king- 
dom, with a change only of outer form. As in the old days of equal- 
ity between man and man, so now between king and people was 
no impassable cleft. The king himself, as formerly the elders, pro- 
nounced justice in the gate, though David toward the end of his 
reign, if the demagogic appeal of the rebel Absalom can be trusted, 
seems to have neglected this function of his office. In the affair of 
Bathsheba and the devious murder of Uriah, David acted like a 
typical Oriental despot. But this was by exception, for the king in 
Israel, even though a David, still conformed to the pattern of the 
tribal chief. The monarch was accessible at all times to any of his 
subjects. David accepted rebuke by the popular conscience speaking 
through the prophet Nathan, with a humility not usual with sov- 
ereigns. The wise woman of Tekoa was admitted to his immediate 
presence to plead her cause before him. Even Shimei with curses on 
his lips and violence in his hands was allowed to approach the king. 
Israel never wholly surrendered its immemorial right of free speech, 
of which later the prophets were shining exemplars. 

But the kingdom that David was rearing out of the local groups 
and by conquest required a more complex administration than served 
for the separate tribes. To meet growing demands, officials were ap- 
pointed to share the labors of the king. The recorder or remem- 
brancer brought before him all business of state needing his personal 
attention. The scribe was entrusted with the royal correspondence, 
as in the stirring days of the Amarna letters; and he may also have 
prepared the annals, such as are often referred to in the Book of 
Kings. In another respect the new kingdom took pattern from the 
example of ancient despotisms: David seems to have instituted the 


labor-gang in Israel, for among his officials was an overseer of the 
166 


-HIGH NOON 


“men subject to task-work.”’ Greatest of ceremonious occasions was 
worship. The king himself indeed might offer sacrifice. But with 
increase of royal grandeur, as the capital was drawing larger num- 
bers of the people to itself and the sanctuary there gained preémi- 
nence in the land, David appointed for its service a company of 
priests, among them his own sons. Prophets too attained official 
station; attached to the court as David’s “seer,” the prophet Gad 
was consulted in matters of great moment. Thus David, skilfully 
using the old material of familiar custom, yet gave it heightened 
effect; and with it he blended new institutions modelled upon other 
kingdoms. 

These forms and instruments of government which David was 
creating, could not be imposed from above upon the people without 
resistance. So irksome to their free spirit was the system of forced 
labor that only a generation later, on the death of the luxurious Sol- 
omon, the people rose in open rebellion against the burdens laid upon 
them by the tyranny of kings. The Israelites, loving liberty, were 
not to be made over in an instant by royal decree. Yet with the 
lapse of years, the powers vested originally in the tribal elders were 
usurped by the officials of the court, with whom access of authority 
led to its abuse. Gradually, too, an aristocracy based on wealth and 
royal favor superseded the old popular social forms. The long con- 
flict that ensued between rich and poor, the privileged and the op- 
pressed, in which the people found their champions in the prophets, 
was the most characteristic episode of Israelite history. The organ- 
ization of the government and court by David marks the beginning 
of the struggle. 

To maintain his own sovereignty as well as to secure his kingdom 
against enemies from without, David refashioned the armed forces 
of the nation. Formerly, all the tribesmen able to wield spear or 

167 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL | 


bow or sling went forth, led by their chieftain, to fight at need, 
whether in a raiding party, in a tribal quarrel, or in self-defence; the 
battle decided, they returned again to their flocks or fields. Saul was 
the first of the leaders of Israel to marshal a standing army. David, 
king at Jerusalem, not only extended the organization begun by 
Saul, but established it upon a different basis, working from the 
centre outwards. To recruit a permanent militia among the tribes, 
he took a census of the people; enrolling thus all men liable for duty, 
he appointed over them captains of thousands and captains of hun- 
dreds. Therewith, for the immemorial volunteer system he substi- 
tuted compulsory service. These forces, subject to muster against 
external foes, provided for national defence and made possible such 
limited foreign conquest as Israel was able to effect. But David’s 
first care was to assure the power of the king. The nucleus of his 
army was the royal bodyguard of six hundred men, composed in part 
of David’s followers in his outlaw days. Numbered among the body- 
guard also were the Cherethites and Pelethites; and a force of six 
hundred Philistines were quartered in Jerusalem immediately at the 
king’s call. Still closer to David was a corps @élite of the thirty 
“mighty men,” to whom are attributed deeds of especial valor in his 
service. Like this corps of heroes, the troops of foreign mercenaries 
who made up the bodyguard were distinguished from the old levies 
of the tribesmen by their exclusive devotion to the person of the king. 
As they were without tribal affiliations in Israel, they could be counted 
on, as events proved, to support the king against any group among 
the people who might seek to resist the royal authority. To bind the 
army further in personal loyalty, David appointed as his chief 
officers, attached to the court, either his immediate kinsmen, like his 
nephew Joab, general of the militia, or clansmen of Judah, like Be- 
naiah, commander of the Cherethites and Pelethites, — men on whose 
168 


HIGH NOON 


devotion to himself he could rely in any crisis. Thus was drawn in 
the nation a different line of cleavage: no longer tribe against tribe, 
but the king against the people. 

With a shrewd disposal of the resources of his kingdom, David in- 
vested royalty with a new pomp. The tent or village house that had 
sufficed for Saul no longer befitted the residence of a king. So David 
ordained a palace in the citadel. As the skill to build it was lacking 
among the farmer and shepherd tribesmen of Israel, he drew upon 
the opulence of ancient Tyre, whose king graciously sent cedar trees 
and masons and carpenters to frame a worthy dwelling for his fellow 
monarch of the kingdom but just now taking shape in Canaan. Es- 
tablished in his capital, David, as suited his expanding dignity, 
added numerously to his harem — according to the manners of the 
time, a sign and measure of royal greatness. While still in Hebron, 
he had six wives, who bore him six sons. At Jerusalem he took yet 
other wives and ten concubines; here sons, of whom eleven are named, 
and daughters were born to him. The princes had their separate es- 
tablishments, distinct from the king’s palace. When on occasion 
royalty made appearance before the people, it was attended with a 
flourish of magnificence. Absalom and Adonijah, rebelling against 
the king their father, prepared themselves chariots and horsemen 
and fifty men to run before them. By comparison, Gideon at his 
threshing, the outlaw Jephthah, even Saul driving his father’s oxen, 
receded into an obscure past whose distance from the glitter of this 
moment was not gauged by the lapse of years. 

In his palace David dispensed hospitality with regal generosity. 
Not only the officials of the court ate at his table. Thither were 
bidden guests whom the king wished to honor: thus David assigned 
a place to the cripple Meribaal, son of the friend of his youth, Jona- 
than, and grandson of Saul, though his piety toward the memory of 

169 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Saul may have been tempered in this instance by a reasonable pru- 
dence. The table was spread abundantly; and feasting was enlivened 
by the music of singing men and women. In elaborating the style 
of his court, David might emulate the example of the Canaanite 
city-kings; but their wealth, amassed in centuries of trade and handi- 
craft, far exceeded the produce of the simple Israelite folk, however 
much the national revenues might be increased by the booty of petty 
wars. Of direct contact with the secular elegance of Egypt and Baby- 
lonia or the rising power of Assyria, there is no trace. It remained 
for Solomon to bring Israel into the circle of the nations on anything 
like equal terms. 


The splendor of surface that David laid upon court and capital had 
a basis in solid achievement for the nation. Swept forward by his 
far-seeing energy, Israel was fast becoming the dominant power in 
Canaan; for David not only had united the tribes as never before, 
under his centralized government, but he also greatly extended the 
boundaries of his kingdom and imposed the will of Israel upon neigh- 
boring peoples. His first task, to ensure the integrity of the nation, 
was definitely to check the advance of the Philistines, which for 
nearly a century had threatened the independence of the tribes; and 
in this, after a series of battles, he was completely successful. The 
Philistines retained their original territory along the coast; but their 
might as conquerors in the land was broken. Undisputed master in 
central Canaan, therefore, David had now to secure his eastern bor- 
ders. Beyond the Dead Sea he smote the Moabites, ancestral en- 
emies of Israel, putting to death two thirds of the people, and he com- 
pelled the nation to pay tribute. In the days of Eglon, whom Ehud 
slew, the relations were reversed. A more formidable undertaking 
was the campaign against the Ammonites, whose territory lay north 

170 


HIGH NOON 


of Moab. Already Saul had defeated them in delivering from their 
hands the city of Jabesh-gilead; but their king Nahash had shown 
kindness to David, rebel against Saul. On the death of Nahash, 
David sent his servants to comfort the new king of Ammon concern- 
ing his father. But the Ammonites, pretending to regard the emis- 
saries as spies, treated them with extreme indignity. The only pos- 
sible rejoinder was war. Knowing the power of Israelite arms, the of- 
fenders summoned aid of the Arameans, their neighbors on the north, 
a people of Semitic stock settled in the region whose chief city was 
Damascus. In the first campaign, David’s general Joab defeated 
their combined forces in the field; and the following year, after a 
siege, he took the Ammonite capital. The inhabitants of the city 
were brought away to do forced labor; besides the rich spoils which 
the victors gathered, the country was laid under tribute. Meanwhile 
David, at the head of an army levied among all the people, went out 
against a coalition of Aramean princes. Ina battle east of the Jordan. 
he routed the enemy and made their cities subject to Israel. Finally 
David carried war into Edom, far to the south. He set garrisons in 
the country, gained possession of two ports at the head of the Red 
Sea, and won control of trade routes passing through Arabia. 

Asa result of these wars, waged in the first half of his reign, David, 
though strictly in possession only of former Israelite and Judahite 
territory, extended the authority of his kingdom from the borders of 
the Philistines and the Phoenicians on the west to the desert beyond 
Jordan on the east, from the Red Sea and the southern wilderness 
northward to the region of Damascus. The royal treasury was en- 
riched by tribute and by booty, gold, silver, brass, and precious 
stones; horses and chariots captured from the enemy equipped the 
king’s guard. Moreover, David’s conquests opened to Israel the 
highways of foreign commerce. The wealth thus suddenly pouring 

171 


' THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


into the kingdom and access to the products of other, more highly 
developed nations flowered in the grandiose luxury of Solomon. 
Yet the Israelites, though stout fighters on occasion, were not by 
nature a conquering people. At the outset, they won their footing in 
Canaan by spear and bow; for two centuries they had to maintain 
themselves by readiness to repel attack; the hazards of war lifted 
David to his present eminence. But once the Israelites were estab- 
lished on the soil, warfare was not their trade nor lust of power their 
dominant passion. Their own small land, with its varied climate and 
topography, answered the needs of a shepherd and farmer folk. Lim- 
ited to petty rivalries among the tribes, their world outlook was a 
narrow one. Israel, exclusive, self-sufficient, had no desire to sub- 
ject alien peoples to its control, and lacked besides the skill to or- 
ganize and administer a great empire. It was due to the innate qual- 
ities of the tribes, that the kingdom which the unique genius of David 
called into brief being survived its creator but a generation. On the 
death of his son Solomon, the nation parted, rent by forces from 
within. 

As against other peoples in contact with them, the tribes of Israel 
stood forth a united nation. Their rapid rise to dominion under 
David, following the tentatives of Saul, woke in them a conscious- 
ness of political solidarity, different from the old tribal ties of kin- 
ship; and their union in a monarchy conferred upon them a truly 
national existence. The Hebrew newcomers into Canaan, though 
modified in the process, had finally absorbed the earlier resident 
population. At first the invaders, when victorious in arms, had put 
the conquered to the sword. Then followed in the period of the 
Judges a time of gradual adjustment, by treaty, by intermarriage, 
and by the natural fusion of two peoples dwelling side by side with 
common interests and occupations. Saul, indeed, had proved faith- 

172 


HIGH NOON 


less to an old treaty with the Gibeonites and sought to slay them. 
But in general Israel had won its dominance in Canaan by less sud- 
den and violent means. David felt himself sufficiently master of the 
situation to spare the Jebusite inhabitants of Jerusalem, when he 
captured the city; and he enlisted in the service of the king and the 
state many foreigners, among them a man of the Hittites, who once 
had contended with the might of Egypt for suzerainty in Canaan. 
Under David the century-long transition was virtually complete. 
The invaders had fused with the native peoples; and the resultant 
was known as Israel. No less, the independence of the Israelite state 
was recognized by neighboring powers. When David defeated the 
league of Aramean princes, another Aramean king, hostile to them, 
sent his son with rich presents to felicitate his fellow monarch of Is- 
rael on his victory. The king of Tyre, with friendly understanding 
between equals, supplied David with workmen and materials for 
building the royal palace at Jerusalem. And it was as one sovereign 
to another that David despatched ambassadors to the king of Am- 
mon on a mission of diplomatic courtesy. So Israel rose into its place 
among the nations. 

But as always, disruptive forces were at work within. The tend- 
ency to division, ever characteristic of the tribes, was too strong 
for even the compelling genius of David to master wholly. When 
Absalom, eldest of David’s sons, in rebellion against his father, 
sought to make himself king, he established headquarters at Hebron, 
counting on the disaffection of Judah to aid his designs. For the 
Judahites felt that David, though of their own bone and flesh, had 
not accorded them the recognition they deserved in the nation; and 
jealous of the northern tribes, they might well have resented the 
transfer of the royal seat from Hebron to Jerusalem. Also the Ben- 

173 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


jaminites, loyal to the memory of their first king, were never fully 
reconciled to the rule of David. The princeling Meribaal, grandson 
of Saul, whom David had attached to his own household, refused to 
leave Jerusalem, when David fled the city in fear of Absalom; for he 
thought: To-day shall the house of Israel restore me the kingdom of 
my father. All the grievances of Benjamin found voice in Shimei, a 
man of the family of Saul, who came out to meet David in his flight, 
and cast stones and dust at him and curses: “Begone, begone, thou 
man of blood, and base fellow: Yahweh hath returned upon thee all 
the blood of the house of Saul, in whose stead thou hast reigned!”’ A 
more significant instance of the mutual jealousies of the tribes and 
their lack of devotion to the united kingdom was the quarrel between 
Israel and Judah, when David, upon Absalom’s death, returned in 
triumph to Jerusalem. 

Now Israel had fled every man to his tent. And all the people 
were at strife throughout all the tribes of Israel, saying, The king 
delivered us out of the hand of our enemies, and he saved us out of 
the hand of the Philistines; and now he is fled out of the land from 
Absalom. And Absalom, whom we anointed over us, is dead in bat- 
tle. Now therefore why speak ye not a word of bringing the king 
back? 

And king David sent to Zadok and to Abiathar the priests, saying, 
Speak unto the elders of Judah, saying, Why are ye the last to bring 
the king back to his house? ... Ye are my brethren, ye are my bone 
and my flesh: wherefore then are ye the last to bring back the king? 
... And he bowed the heart of all the men of Judah, even as the 
heart of one man; so that they sent unto the king, saying, Return 
thou, and all thy servants. So the king returned, and came to Jordan. 
And Judah came to Gilgal, to go to meet the king, to bring the king 
over Jordan.... 

So the king went over to Gilgal: and all the people of Judah brought 
the king over, and also half the people of Israel. And, behold, all the 
men of Israel came to the king, and said unto the king, Why have 

174 


HIGH NOON 


our brethren the men of Judah stolen thee away, and brought the 
king, and his household, over Jordan, and all David’s men with 
him? And all the men of Judah answered the men of Israel, Because 
the king is near of kin to us: wherefore then be ye angry for this 
matter? have we eaten at all of the king’s cost? or hath he given us 
any gift? And the men of Israel answered the men of Judah, and said, 
We have ten parts in the king, and we have also more right in David 
than ye: why then did ye despise us, that our advice should not be 
first had in bringing back our king? And the words of the men of 
Judah were fiercer than the words of the men of Israel. 

Among the first to welcome David was the malcontent Shimei, 
who had dared to curse the king when he was in flight; and with 
Shimei were a thousand Benjaminites. Meribaal also hastened to 
atone for his former disloyalty. But the quarrel between Israel and 
Judah on the occasion of the king’s return furnished opportunity 
to another Benjaminite, Sheba by name, to sound again the call to 
rebellion: 


We have no portion in David, 
Neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: 
Every man to his tents, O Israel! 


Whereupon all the men of Israel left David and followed Sheba: but 
the men of Judah clave unto their king, from Jordan even to Jerusa- 
lem. That the revolt was speedily crushed but throws into sharper 
relief the ready fickleness of the tribes. Quick to take offence, their 
inconstant spirit was as quickly appeased. But always acutely jeal- 
ous of their own rights, the tribes were not willing to merge individ- 
ual differences in common action and permanent union. 


Working with intractable material, David lifted Israel to a wealth — 
and power of which indeed its past had held little promise. Yet even 
in this culminating hour of noontide, the nation which he moulded to 
unwonted greatness still bore the stamp of its origins. As the outer 

175 


v 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


forms of tribal organization had impressed themselves upon the 
kingdom, so also the inherent character of the race was reflected in 
the manners of the time. The people that had in its keeping the 
secret of Yahweh was still very human. Except for a reaching out 
after the one God, except for a moral sense which seems to have been 
innate but was unfolding slowly, Israel had not yet passed the level 
of contemporary peoples. 

The story of David’s reign in its personal aspects is a tale of ele- 
mentary passions hardly restrained. Lust, adultery, and incest 
touched the highest personages of the court. David himself was 
notably unscrupulous; and the prince Amnon was a flagrant offender. 
Utter disregard of the rights of others, characteristic of those who 
had the means to carry out their wills, was exemplified by the hot- 
mettled Absalom. In disgrace with his father, the young prince sum- 
moned the royal general-in-chief Joab to his presence, once and 
again. When the old warrior refused a second time to come, Absa- 
lom commanded his servants to set fire to Joab’s field of barley. The 
incident is not without a kind of rough humor; for Joab seems not to 
have resented too much Absalom’s peremptory methods, but came 
and did the prince’s bidding. Cruelty toward a foreign enemy was 
usual in war. But David did not spare his own subjects; without de- 
mur he gave over the sons of Saul to the terrible vengeance of the 
Gibeonites. Another time, to escape the consequences of his private 
wrong-doing, he contrived the death in battle of one of his ablest and 
most loyal officers. But common murder as well was rife in atrocious 
forms. The rude temper of the people found embodiment at its 
fiercest in the grim soldier Joab, the king’s mainstay of force. With 
no outrage of the conscience of the period, Joab slew Abner in the 
city gate, in revenge for his brother’s death. His horrid murder of 
Amasa had less justification, though equally it went unpunished. 

176 


HIGH NOON 


Goaded by jealousy and defeated ambition, for the king had set 
Amasa in Joab’s place as captain of the host, the old general took 
Amasa unawares by the ruse of a concealed weapon. With a ges- 
ture as if to greet him, Joab smote his rival in the body and shed his 
bowels to the ground; and he left him wallowing in his blood in the 
midst of the highway. One of Joab’s followers, less hardened than 
his chief, carried the body out of the highway into a field and covered 
it with a garment. Law and order of the state had not yet super- 
vened upon the wild justice of the old heroic days; and grievous 
wrongs were punished, if at all, by the tribal custom of individual 
revenge. So Absalom, for the injury done to his sister, lured the of- 
fender into his power by deliberate treachery; and when Amnon’s 
heart was merry with wine at a feast of sheep-shearing, Absalom by 
the hand of his servants struck him down, his half-brother. To es- 
cape the anger of the king, the only reckoning that he feared, Absa- 
lom fled the kingdom. 

These of course are the deep shadows. Out of the welter of vio- 
lence and evil emerge bright generous deeds of knightly souls. David 
magnanimously pardoned the base dog Shimei, who had assailed 
Yahweh’s anointed with stones and curses; the man in him rose su- 
perior to the king: and he accepted with fine humility the prophet’s 
rebuke of his gross sin against the husband of Bathsheba. Climbing 
the steeps of success or chastened by misfortune, David revealed 
rare qualities of mind and heart; and lesser men, in acts of high de- 
votion, were not unworthy of his example. Against the murky back- 
ground of innate disposition and moral environment, Israel’s achieve- 
ments of the spirit are alight with the more unaccountable lustre. 


David’s last years were perplexed by filial rebellion and palace 
intrigues in contest for the throne, which the king’s failing strength 
177 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


would soon be forced to yield. The right of the eldest son to the suc- 
cession was not yet established in Israel; as with the tribal sheikh, 
the king might appoint to his throne from among all his sons. Withal, 
appeal might still be made to the people for their concurrence and 
active support. So it was that Absalom sought to win popular favor 
for his pretensions. Furnished forth with the accoutrements of roy- 
alty, he stationed himself in the city gate and pleaded his own cause 
with each passer-by, to the derogation of the king. “Oh that I were 
made judge in the land, that every man who hath any suit or cause 
might come unto me, and I would do him justice!’ And it was so, 
that when any man came nigh to do him obeisance, he put forth his 
hand, and took hold of him, and kissed him. And on this manner did 
Absalom to all Israel that came to the king for judgment: so Absalom 
stole the hearts of the men of Israel. Moreover, he sent spies through- 
out all the tribes of Israel, saying, “‘As soon as ye hear the sound of 
the trumpet, then ye shall say, Absalom is king in Hebron.” And the 
conspiracy was strong; for the people increased continually with 
Absalom. The aging king was compelled to flee the capital and to 
seek refuge in loyal territory beyond Jordan. But with the violent 
death of the aspiring prince, which brought sorrow to his father, the 
revolt collapsed, and David returned to Jerusalem. 

Adonijah, next in age to Absalom, ventured a similar attempt. 
Like his elder brother, and himself also a handsome princely figure, 
Adonijah prepared chariots and horsemen and fifty men to run be- 
fore him. Dissensions at the court had alienated some of David’s 
officers; and Adonijah persuaded to his cause the old general Joab, 
and the priest Abiathar, who had rendered special service to David 
in the early days of his rise to power. Calling all his brothers, the 
king’s sons, except Solomon, and all the men of Judah — for again 
tribal divisions seem to have played a part — Adonijah at an ancient 

178 


HIGH NOON 


sanctuary outside Jerusalem held a great sacrificial feast to impas- 
sion the crowd; and by the assembled company he was acclaimed 
king. 

Still loyal to the weakened monarch, however, were the priest 
Zadok, the prophet Nathan, also Benaiah, captain of the mercena- 
ries, and with him the king’s bodyguard of “mighty men.” Prime 
movers in the close intrigue that centred about Solomon to promote 
his claims against the manceuvres of Adonijah, now on the point of 
attaining quick success, were the royal mother Bathsheba and the 
sagacious Nathan. These two, working in collusion, drew from the 
dying king the formal declaration that Solomon should reign in his 
stead. 

So Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the 
son of Jehoiada, and the Cherethites and the Pelethites, went down, 
and caused Solomon to ride upon king David’s mule, and brought 
him to Gihon. And Zadok the priest took the horn of oil out of the 
Tent, and anointed Solomon. And they blew the trumpet; and all 
the people said, God save king Solomon! And all the people came 
up after him, and the people piped with pipes, and rejoiced with 
great joy, so that the earth rent with the sound of them. 

By such means and after this manner was Solomon made king. 
Immediately it became evident that with his accession, kingship in 
Israel had entered upon a new phase in its rapid development since 
Saul left the driving of his oxen to bear faltering rule over the tribes. 
David, master of men, advancing swiftly to complete dominion, had 
yet governed with some regard for public opinion and individual 
rights. But Solomon straightway showed himself to be absolute. 
His first acts gave notice that the will of the king was the supreme 
law. In visiting summary punishment upon his former enemies, the 
young monarch moved less in fear of their present menace to his 
throne than in a spirit of arbitrary personal revenge. The rival 

179 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


prince Adonijah, though he himself furnished a pretext which the 
new king was quick to turn to account, was struck down by the hand 
of Solomon’s captain, Benaiah. And the veteran Joab, whose pro- 
digious services to David in framing the monarchy counted for 
nothing against his recent support of the pretender, was slain even 
at the altar, where he had taken refuge; its sanctity was of no avail 
against the wilful vengeance of the king. 

The work which David had accomplished by his creative genius 
profited all Israel no less than his own individual fortunes. For his 
authority and prestige increased directly with the increase of the na- 
tion. The kingship which centred in his person grew in importance 
according as he united the several tribes under his single rule and ex- 
tended their borders by foreign wars, and as he enriched his people 
by the spoils of conquest and the gains of trade. At this moment the 
greatness of the nation determined the greatness of its king. To the 
solid achievement of David his son fell heir. But the power that David 
had won to the benefit of all Israel, Solomon now arrogated to himself 
as sole and supreme potentate, and he used it for his personal glori- 
fication. The advantage accruing to the nation from Solomon’s mag- 
nificence was only incidental to the aggrandizement of the king.! 

The reign of Solomon spanned a period of comparative peace. 
Edom rebelled and recovered its independence in part, though Israel 
still controlled the ports that gave access to the Red Sea. In Da- 
mascus, where David had stationed a garrison of his troops, a certain 
Rezon, adventurer and free lance like Jephthah and the young 
David, made himself king, in open hostility to Solomon; and he 
founded a dynasty which later came into frequent conflict with 


1 The example of Solomon might well have served to point the saying of 
Montesquieu: ‘‘ Monarchy is destroyed when the prince, directing everything to 
himself, brings the country to the capital, the capital to his court, and the court 
to his own person.” 


180 


HIGH NOON 


Israel. In the south, Egypt, after two centuries of inaction, again 
made its might felt in Canaan; and the Pharaoh captured the old 
city of Gezer, which the Hebrew invaders had never been able to 
wrest from the Canaanites. This stroke, as it happened, turned to 
the advantage of Israel; for Solomon, marrying the Pharaoh’s 
daughter, received Gezer as her dowry. Within the territory con- 
solidated by the statecraft of his father, Solomon aimed to ensure , 
Israelite domination in Canaan by building fortresses at strategic 
points, supported by garrisons and ample provisionment; the king 
also extended and strengthened the fortification of the citadel in 
Jerusalem. To the army as organized by David, he added numerous 
forces of cavalry and war-chariots, long since employed by Egyp- 
tians and Canaanites but new in Israel. By such dispositions Solo- 
mon secured for himself the freedom to put into effect the policies 
closest to his interests. 

Israel, unlike the peoples kindred with it in race, produced few 
leaders of commanding military skill. To the extent that Solomon 
was not a conqueror but a shrewdly capable man of business, he, 
rather than David, represented in the magnified scale of his exalted 
station the part among nations played by Israel, a part unheroic and 
least considerable. For in the vast sweep of world-empires, this little 
nation of the coastland hardly counted politically. The inclusive 
genius of David shed lustre on Israelite prowess for but a moment of 
history. It suited better the temper of Solomon and the character of 
his people on its practical side to seek glory in riches rather than 
vower and fame in war. Accordingly it was a congenial task for the 
young monarch to exploit the position which his father’s labors had 
prepared for him; and he set himself to develop the material re- 
sources of the kingdom ready to his hand. 

By a policy of foreign alliances through marriage, dictated alike by 

181 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


his personal inclinations and by considerations of state, Solomon 
greatly enlarged Israel’s contact with other nations in friendly inter- 
course and to its own benefit. It is related that Solomon loved 
strange women, and he took to himself many wives of the Moabites, 
Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites; notably he espoused 
the richly dowered daughter of the Pharaoh. These alliances, be- 
yond the manifest political advantages they afforded the kingdom 
but newly arrived, also opened the way to exchanges both commer- 
cial and cultural between the simple Israelite folk on the one hand, 
and on the other, the highly mature civilizations of the north and 
east and the world-old opulent empire of Egypt. Solomon was quick 
to seize the opportunity that favoring circumstances placed within 
his reach. The lie of the land peculiarly facilitated the development 
of trade. The highways from Egypt and Arabia to the realms of the 
north and to Babylonia led across Canaan: so from the richly laden 
caravans that filed the length of his territory, the king of Israel was 
able, in return for protection accorded them, to exact heavy toll; and 
Solomon undertook large ventures on his own account. As middle- 
man he forwarded a profitable traffic in horses and chariots between 
Egypt and the northern countries. With the help of his friend 
the king of Tyre, he maintained a fleet of trading ships, manned 
by Phoenician sailors, which brought back from distant voyages 
gold, silver, rare woods, ivory, and precious stones for the king’s 
sumptuousness, and also —a revealing instance — apes and pea- 
cocks for the idle delight of royal favorites. In exchange for such 
articles of luxury Solomon could offer only the simple products of the 
soil, grain, wine, oil, and balsam, gathered by the dull labor of his 
subjects. With the increase of the king’s repute abroad and of his 
resources at home, the breach between court and people was widening 
rapidly. 
182 


HIGH NOON 


For the wealth that now flowed through the land finally streamed 
in upon the capital, to the sole magnificence of the monarch and his 
entourage. Solomon’s profuse expenditures, suited rather to the 
scale of secular potentates than to the humble Israelite kingdom, 
bore little relation to the welfare of the people. The service which 
he was to render the nation in building for himself a chapel at Jeru- 
salem he could hardly have intended or foreseen; that the Temple 
should become the refuge and rallying-point of a distressed and 
dispersed people lay yet in the future. In general, though Solo- 
mon’s policies enlarged Israel’s horizon, the extravagances of the 
vainglorious king worked added hardships rather than amelioration 
for the masses. 

As the revenues of trade alone did not suffice for his regal lavish- 
ness, Solomon resorted to burdensome taxes and the coercion of 
labor. Twelve districts, into which the kingdom was divided without 
reference to the old cherished tribal groupings, administered not by 
the elders but by officials of the court, had each for a month to sup- 
ply the needs of the king’s prodigal establishment — food in vast 
quantities for his numerous household and throng of dependents, 
and likewise provender for the royal stables. The people must also 
have been compelled to furnish the enormous payments of grain and 
oil which Solomon made to the king of Tyre in return for his aid in 
the construction of the Temple and the palaces at Jerusalem, twenty 
thousand measures of wheat and twenty thousand baths of pure oil, 
year by year. Furthermore, in order to carry out his ambitious build- 
ing projects, Solomon raised a forced levy of all Israel. The numbers 
cited by the historian doubtless are exaggerated as to the real facts, 
but they are true to the impression which so high-handed a proceed- 
ing made upon the nation. Thirty thousand were sent to cut timber 
in the forests of Lebanon. And Solomon had threescore and ten 

183 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


thousand that bare burdens, and fourscore thousand that were hew- 
ers in the mountains. Besides the king’s chief officers charged with 
the general conduct of the work, there were three thousand three 
hundred overseers directly over the laborers. Chosen to be the serv- 
ant of his people, the king in Israel was become their master. 

In the result, so contrary to the temper and traditions of Israel 
were these measures of oppression that they entailed their own 
speedy retribution. The hardships of Solomon’s rule bore more 
heavily upon the northern tribes, for Judah, whose services to David 
were remembered by his august son, was in part exempted from 
forced contributions. Not without reason, therefore, it was a man of 
Ephraim, one of the king’s overseers risen from the ranks, who was to 
lead the revolt which, though the first attempt miscarried, cost Solo- 
mon’s successor more than half his kingdom. The glory of Solomon 
was bought at the price of Israel’s unity as a nation, leaving it power- 
less and a prey to more militant states. 

Wealth and the worldly prestige attaching to it were so excep- 
tional in the whole history of Israel that the riches of Solomon loomed 
out of all proportion, in the dazzled retrospect of less fortunate days. 
Even the writers closest in time to Solomon’s reign shared the pride 
of his magnificence, ignoring the reverse side of the picture. The 
brilliance radiating from the court blinded the onlookers to the at- 
tendant shadows in which the people moved. But this view of the 
royal grandeur, however distorted in the vision of later generations, 
was true to its own near perspective; illusion was not mirage, but 
rose out of fact. Modest in comparison with Egypt or Babylonia, 
yet the splendor of Solomon was the greatest that Israel ever knew. 
The king did not stint expenditure, but took care only to make his 
wealth count visibly. With the love of display born of riches sud- 
denly acquired, he bent his really great energies to erecting at Jeru- 

184 


HIGH NOON 


salem sumptuous palaces, imposing halls of state, and the elabo- 
rately fashioned sanctuary of Yahweh — the whole with spacious 
outlying courts enclosed by a wall of heavy stones and cedar timbers. 
Seven years was he in building the Temple and thirteen years in 
rearing his palace. Upon the adornment and furnishing of the 
buildings was poured out the utmost of luxury at the monarch’s com- 
mand: immense blocks of hewn or sawed stone, pillars, panellings 
and carvings of cedar and olive-wood, inlays of ivory and precious 
stones, wrought gold, silver, and bronze, and rich embroideries, all 
were cunningly assembled to minister to the vanity of the king. The 
description of these marvels, as detailed in the narratives, taxes the 
extreme capabilities of a fervent imagination rioting in wonder and 
praise. 

With due allowance for the pride of the historians, yet these mon- 
uments of royal glory stand in striking contrast to the humble con- 
dition of the people. Significant of the meagre resources of the king- 
dom as well as of the degree of culture at which Israel had so far 
arrived, is the fact that Solomon owed his triumphs at Jerusalem to 
assistance from abroad. His buildings, designed on foreign models — 
Egyptian influence working through Phoenicia — were constructed 
of foreign materials by foreign craftsmen. The extent of his indebt- 
edness is indicated by the payments made to Hiram, king of Tyre. 
In addition to an annual return of great quantities of wheat and oil, 
Solomon was obliged to cede to his ally twenty cities in Galilee. 
The monarch despoiled his kingdom and embittered his people to 
enrich himself. The effulgence of a moment was swiftly overcast by 
cloud and storm. 

The days passed prodigally at the capital. Though the people 
toiled obscurely, the court lacked nothing of the brilliance appro- 
priate to so grandiose a setting. The numbers of the royal harem 

185 


THE GENIUS OF _ ISRAEL 


were a gauge of the magnificence to which the king attained, no less 
than a witness to his personal predilections. The oriental tempera- 
ment was incarnate in Solomon in its most florid exuberance. The 
foreign princesses of the palace, attended by their own retinue, wor- 
shipping their native gods with ceremonies pertinent to them, re- 
flected upon the capital a shimmer of cosmopolitan distinction. The 
wit and wisdom of Israel’s king, famed afar, attracted to his court 
illustrious visitors from distant lands. For a brief instant Israel held 
place in the circle of great nations. The material power and worldly 
repute of the kingdom were at flood tide. 


in the reign of Solomon, for the first time since the tribes were 
settled on the soil of Canaan, access was made possible in any large 
measure to the wealth and culture of an elder world. Such contact 
was needed ultimately to assure the emergence of this small people 
into the ken of history. But this turn in the current of the nation’s 
fortunes was not immediately decisive of great changes in the life of 
Israel. Whatever advantages resulted from Solomon’s rule centred 
in the capital at Jerusalem; the mass of the people received no share 
in the riches that the king drew to himself. The changes that might 
have attended a wider outlook or followed the influx of new ideas 
encountered the conservative, exclusive temper of the tribes. The 
harsh procedures necessary to effect the king’s policies conflicted 
sharply with the old tribal spirit of independence. Even more fun- 
damental was their intolerance of foreign influences; and the real 
leaders among the people, striving to remain true to the faith of the 
fathers, resisted the perverting pressure of alien customs and ideas. 
But worldly power was the least of Israel’s titles to remembrance. 
The true genius of this poor and unregarded people was a genius for 
spiritual truth; and the splendor-loving king did little to forward its 
186 > 


HIGH NOON 


development. The greatness of Solomon passed, and left only a 
legend. He vastly embellished the court, and invested his person 
and name with a fabulous glory. The people throughout the land, 
dwelling in villages, remained keepers of sheep and tillers of the soil. 


xX 
THE KING’S PEACE 


It was not in the deeds of conqueror kings, not in the craft of builders 
and artists, that Israel found expression, but by the mouth of proph- 
ets, who were yet to come. These were the true representatives of its 
genius. The material of their teaching they drew from common ex- 
perience, as the centuries had determined it; and they addressed 
their appeal to all the people in their familiar daily ways. Israel’s 
national and personal character, which the prophets invoked to re- 
pentance and new effort, was forming in the period of the settlement 
and the early monarchy. From the beginning to the affluent years 
of Solomon, the workaday life of the Israelites showed them to be a 
people of narrow outlook, limited skill, and meagre resources. A life 
of toil, unlighted by the glamours of art, yet it was not lacking in va- 
riety or significance. And in the humble tasks and pleasures of the 
countryside are to be traced the influences that moulded the temper 
of Israel and shaped its history. 

The Hebrew tribes had won their first footing in Canaan among 
the hills; only with the lapse of years had they spread down into the 
plains. The gradual transition from their desert way of life to new 
conditions and occupations proceeded at uneven pace, according to 
the region in which they found a lodgment. Some tribes on the bor- 
ders of Canaan long retained their nomad habitudes. Others, in more 
fertile territories, learned to till the ground. Judah, less favored in 
the south country than the planters of Ephraim, gained a difficult 
livelihood by the tending of flocks. Until David captured Jerusalem, 

the Israelites had not completely penetrated the ancient fortified 
188 


THE KING’S PEACE 


cities, where dwelt the craftsman and the merchant. Among the 
farmer folk, trade was only barter; and of artisanship the Israelite 
peasant practised so much as sufficed for his private needs. The 
product of field or home-workshop offered little surplus for exchange 
with distant regions. Each group lived for itself. The circle of im- 
mediate interests defined its horizon; the neighborhood was its 
world. 

In such little communities scattered over the land, the old tribal 
affiliations persisted asa memory. The original clan relationships, as 
the Israelites fused with the native farmer people, were merged in the 
ties of place. The smaller unit was still the family, for as yet the in- 
dividual had no independent standing apart from his connections; 
the larger unit, instead of clan or tribe, came to be the neighborhood 
community. With the settlement of the invaders on the soil, the 
sheikh or tribal leader in the desert yielded his control to the elders. 
Not necessarily older men, the elders were heads of families, owing 
their influence to the esteem which attached to their wealth or per- 
sonal qualities. The so-called Judges, who rose to leadership during 
the troubled period of the settlement, served an exceptional occa- 
sion; as single chieftains entrusted for the moment with supreme 
command, they had no fixed status in the system of local govern- 
ment. In ordinary times, though final action which concerned the 
general welfare lay with all the people, the elders served as their 
representatives in matters affecting the group as a whole or in deal- 
ings with other groups in external affairs. Their function within the 
community was mainly judicial, consisting in the task of decision 
and award. In especially difficult or important questions, that re- 
quired reference to the deity for decision by the sacred lot, the judge 
was the priest, who had besides, in virtue of his office, great influence. 
The authority of the priest, however, rested upon a different basis 

189 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


from that of the elders: the one reverted to the deity; the other pro- 
ceeded from the people. The form of government in the local 
groups, therefore, was thoroughly democratic in spirit — the same 
spirit that expressed itself in the resistance of the people to the en- 
croachments of the monarchy. 

The social life of the community centred in the village or the 
larger town, located near some favoring spring of water, or on a hill 
for readier defence. By day the people went out to work in the fields; 
at evening they returned to the cluster of dwellings, huddled to- 
gether for companionship and protection, which made their home. 
The little houses, with walls of sun-baked clay or rough stones, built 
around a bare earth floor, were usually one story in height, and often 
enclosed but a single room, where the family and its household ani- 
mals found common shelter. The flat roof, reached by steps outside 
the wall, served many purposes. Here one might sleep, as Samuel 
lodged the young peasant Saul upon the housetop, and as a tent was 
spread there for Absalom when he seized the king’s palace for his 
own residence. Here one laid out flax to dry, like Rahab in Jericho. 
A place of constant resort, the housetop furnished an excellent 
observation-point from which to overlook the doings of one’s 
neighbors. An occasion of the sort once proved a fateful moment in 
the private life of David. Between the houses wound crooked streets, 
too narrow to afford more than mere passage. The only open space 
lay in the broad entering gate; and here the people gathered for 
affairs and sociable exchange. Here were the market and the court 
of law; the elders sat in the gate to pronounce justice. When the 
day’s work was over, the villagers drifted to the broad place for 
idleness, for gossip, for news or entertainment, and to take note of 
any arriving stranger. All the little concerns of every day were 
public; life, intense and animated within its bounds, was lived in 

190 


THE KING’S PEACE 


common. Such homogeneous material readily received a single 
impress. 

A scene from village life is limned in the story of the Levite, so- 
journing on the farther side of the hill country of Ephraim, who was 
fetching home his concubine after a visit with her father in Beth- 
lehem-judah. They were travelling, attended by his servant and 
with two asses, saddled, past Jerusalem, but would not turn in there 
because it was a city of the foreigners; and they pressed on toward 
Gibeah. 


And he said unto his servant, Come and let us draw near to one of 
these places; and we will lodge in Gibeah, or in Ramah. So they 
passed on and went their way; and the sun went down upon them 
near to Gibeah, which belongeth to Benjamin. And they turned 
aside thither, to go in to lodge in Gibeah: and he went in and sat him 
down in the street of the city; for there was no man that took them 
into his house to lodge. And, behold, there came an old man from 
his work out of the field at even: now the man was of the hill country 
of Ephraim, and he sojourned in Gibeah; but the men of the place 
were Benjaminites. And he lifted up his eyes, and saw the wayfaring 
man in the street of the city; and the old man said, Whither goest 
thou? and whence comest thou? And he said unto him, We are pass- 
ing from Beth-lehem-judah unto the farther side of the hill country of 
Ephraim; from thence am I, and I went to Beth-lehem-judah: and I 
am now going to the house of Yahweh; and there is no man that 
taketh me into his house. Yet there is both straw and provender for 
our asses; and there is bread and wine also for me, and for.thy hand- 
maid, and for the young man which is with thy servants: there is no 
want of any thing. And the old man said, Peace be unto thee; how- 
soever let all thy wants lie upon me; only lodge not in the street. So 
he brought him into his house, and gave the asses fodder: and they 
washed their feet, and did eat and drink. 


The whole narrative, so close to life, so vividly faithful to the man- 
ner of the times, is instinct with the very spirit of the old days. Here 
191 


~ THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the city of Jerusalem, still in possession of the Canaanites, is dis- 
tinguished from the villages of the Israelites, such as Ramah, where 
Samuel dwelt, and Gibeah, the home of Saul. The old man is him- 
self not a native Benjaminite, but a sojourner, a resident alien. 
Coming from his work out of the field at evening, he remarks the 
stranger in the street and befriends him to the full measure of his 
simple resources. The arrival of a stranger was an event of the first 
importance in these little communities of the countryside. And with 
all the means at one’s disposal, hospitality was no more a duty than 
a privilege. 


The labor of the Israelite peasants was not crushing. The house- 
hold tasks, cooking, grinding meal, fetching water, spinning and 
weaving, fell to the women. Women also worked in the fields, and 
they tended sheep. Well-to-do families might have “‘bondservants”’ 
or slaves, but these did not carry the whole burden of labor for their 
masters. During the season of the crops, all the people alike shared 
in the work on the land; thus Saul, whose father was eminent for his 
wealth, drove the oxen at the plough. Planting was begun at the 
time of the early rains in November; the harvest, ripened by the 
latter rains, was gathered in April and May. A light plough, rudely 
fashioned of wood, drawn by oxen which were guided or urged by‘a 
long sharp-pointed goad — such as served Shamgar as a weapon for 
slaying six hundred Philistines! — sufficed to break the thin soil. 
Then followed the sower, scattering his seed broadcast. The ripe 
grain was cut by a sickle of flint or bronze. After the binders had 
gathered the sheaves, the field was opened to the gleaners, who were 
the poor and the sojourners. The threshing-floor, privately owned 
or common to the group, was a flat rock or depression of firmly trod- 


den earth, usually on a hillside where the winds might sweep away 
192 : 


THE KING’S PEACE 


the chaff; and at the time of winnowing it was guarded against local 
thieves or marauding bands from the desert, who would reap where 
they had not sown. Of a harvest scene in ancient Israel: the owner 
of the field coming from the village to oversee the workers, mingling 
with them in friendly wise; the young men and maidens reaping; the 
gleaners following after; the vessels of water at hand, brought for the 
refreshment of the toilers; the noonday meal of bread and parched 
grain and sour wine; the winnowing in the threshing-floor at sun- 
down; the eating and merriment when the day’s work was ended; the 
master sleeping on watch by the heaped-up grain — of these, the 
Book of Ruth has preserved immortally an image. The shadows of 
the picture, the weary toil, the burden of the heat, the rude freedoms 
of men and women together in the fields, the excess of wine, are 
touched in faintly if at all. The civilities of intercourse as sketched 
in the bearing of the principal figures, appropriate as they are to such 
an idyl, are none the less true to the manners of the period. Labor in 
Israel had its lighter side and ameliorations. 

On the stony slopes the peasants cultivated the grape with en- 
thusiasm and devotion — notably in Judea, for it was Judah, in the 
patriarchal Blessing, who should bind his ass’s colt unto the choice 
vine, who washed his garments in wine and his vesture in the blood 
of grapes. The prophet Isaiah depicts the care lavished upon this 
rewarding labor. ‘My well-beloved had a vineyard in a very fruit- 
ful hill: and he digged it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and 
planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, 
and also hewed out a wine-press therein.” The vineyard was walled 
in with stones and hedged about with thorns; the ground was well 
hoed, and the vines were pruned assiduously. “Before the harvest, 
when the blossom is over, and the flower becometh a ripening grape, 
he shall cut off the sprigs with pruning-hooks, and the spreading 

193 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


branches shall he take away and cut down.” The grapes were gath- 
ered in September; and as with the grain harvest, the gleaning was 
left to the poor. The treading of the wine-press was an occasion of 
high rejoicing, attended with singing and shouts and joyful noise. 
The feast of booths or ingathering, which signalized the completion 
of the vintage, was a great popular festival. Wine flowed plente- 
ously in the familiar and ritual life of Israel. 

Of hardly less importance than the vine, and widely cultivated, 
was the olive. These two, together with the fig — and opposed to 
the bramble — are imaged in Jotham’s parable of the king, as the 
characteristic growth of Canaan: the fatness of the olive wherewith 
they honor God and man, the sweetness of the fig, and wine which 
cheereth God and man. The olive abundantly repaid the little labor 
of its cultivation. The tree was beaten, and gleaned, even for two 
or three berries in the top of the uppermost bough, four or five in the 
outmost branches. The fruit and its oil served many uses, for food, 
for light, for anointing. Prized by the rich, it was not wholly lacking 
in the poorest households. Gratefully remembering earth’s bounty, 
Israel chose the fig-tree and the vine as a symbol of well-being and 
contentment. 

Far different from the farmer’s life was the life of the shepherd. 
His work was more dangerous and more constant. Unlike the peas- 
ant, he was not rooted to the land; but in less fertile regions, where 
the soil, too poor for grain or vine, yielded a scanty vegetation, he 
wandered in search of pasturage and water. His home was the 
sparsely peopled, barren hillsides of Judea and the tablelands east of 
Jordan. The prosperous ranchman, possessing large flocks, might 
reside in village or town, as did Laban and Nabal. So likewise in the 
story of Tamar and her daring venture (Gen. 38), Judah is figured as 
a town gentleman. He carried a staff, he wore a signet, and about 

194, 


THE KING’S PEACE 


his neck hung a cord, for the signet or for an amulet or charm. When 
he visited his flocks at sheep-shearing, he must needs take a long jour- 
ney into the hills. But such favored few throw into sharper relief the 
rigors of the shepherd’s life. For the hireling, as also the humble 
keeper of sheep whose little flock was his own, fared arduously. He 
lived in the open, supplied only with such provision as he carried in 
his scrip. He had to defend his charges ‘against thieves and wild 
beasts with staff or sling as his weapon. His shepherd’s flute might be 
the sole companion of his watch, the music of his pipings his only 
cheer. Ever alert, he must bring back the sheep that had strayed, 
tend the sick or wounded one, and carry the tired lamb in his bosom. 
At nightfall, gathering the flock into the fold secured by a wall of 
stones, he lay at the door on guard. For any injury or loss he was 
liable to his master; and the due increase of the flock was in his care. 
Jacob, serving his father-in-law Laban, recites the duties of the good 
shepherd and depicts his hard lot. “This twenty years have I been 
with thee; thy ewes and thy she-goats have not cast their young, and 
the rams of thy flocks have I not eaten. That which was torn of 
beasts I brought not unto thee; I bare the loss of it; of my hand didst 
thou require it, whether stolen by day or stolen by night. Thus I 
was: in the day the drought consumed me, and the frost by night; 
and my sleep fled from mine eyes.” The Israelites had entered the 
promised land as keepers of sheep. Their loyalty to Yahweh was 
then in its pristine freshness, intense and single, not yet debased by 
too familiar contact with the laxities of the alien Canaanites. The 
shepherd’s way of life therefore, identified with the pure worship of 
Yahweh, was idealized in retrospect by devout writers, as an em- 
blem of Yahweh’s loving care of his people. The tender imagery 
woven about it transfigured its hardships. But these were very real, 
and they left their mark on the character of Israel. 
195 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Among a shepherd and farmer folk were no strongly marked 
social differences, though there might be degrees of prosperity. The 
nomad moving from place to place counted his sole wealth in flocks. 
With the settlement of a tribe or clan upon the soil, the individual 
began to acquire property in land; only with such possession as- 
sured to him in permanence, was he able or willing to cultivate fields 
and vineyards and fruit-bearing trees. The Israelite peasant usually 
owned his little plot of ground, which yielded a sufficient livelihood. 
Skill or good fortune worked here, as everywhere, to favor a few over 
the many; and in any group some were richer than their fellows. 
Such a one was the ranchman Nabal. Living in Maon, he pastured 
his flocks on the slopes of Carmel to the number of three thousand 
sheep and one thousand goats. The scale of his household is indi- 
cated in the present that his wife Abigail despatched to David to 
turn aside the outlaw’s impatient anger (1 Sam. 25 18 ); as she was 
forced to act quickly, this generous provision must have been im- 
mediately within reach in the household stores. A man of similar re- 
sources was Ziba, chief servant of the princeling Meribaal. After 
David had summoned the crippled grandson of Saul to his court, he 
made over to Ziba’s charge the property appertaining to Saul’s house. 
Ziba had twenty servants; and he was able to bring to the king flee- 
ing from Jerusalem a couple of asses saddled, and upon them two 
hundred loaves of bread, a hundred clusters of raisins, a hundred of 
summer fruit, and a skin of wine. Yet such wealthy ranchmen or 
landed proprietors were the exception in Israel; and whatever power 
their wealth placed in their hands worked no hardship upon the rest. 
It was not until the reign of Solomon and afterwards, when Israel 
turned to dwell in cities and increase of trade brought a new form of 
riches, that the distinctions of class and privilege began to bear heav- 
ily upon the people. The evils of social injustice, which in later 

196 


THE KING’S PEACE 


generations the prophets denounced bitterly, were unknown in the 
period of the Judges and the early kingdom. Throughout the mass, 
the lot of the Israelites was a pleasant one, not yet overburdened by 
the oppressions of foreign conquerors or excessive inequalities at 
home. Obscure and inglorious, unredeemed by any forms of art ex- 
pression other than story-telling, song, and dancing, yet their ways 
were not wholly untouched by imaginative values. 

Labor in the fields and the lonely watches in wilder regions were 
only a part of Israel’s life. Once released from the routine of neces- 
sity, the soul of the people found utterance in their festivals and rit- 
ual observances. These were occasions of meeting and rejoicing for 
all the group in common or at the least for whole families together. 
Imagination and emotion, swaying all in a single collective enthu- 
siasm, set free the spirit and rendered it susceptible to any powerful 
stimulus. Here was plastic material which leaders of the people 
might shape to their own purposes. That these leaders proved to be 
the prophets is significant of Israel’s predispositions. It was many 
years in the future that the great prophets came forward to bring 
the latent genius of the people into effect. But during the period up 
to the time of Solomon, Israel revealed something of its character in 
the ideas which prompted its religious rites and animated its popular 
festivals. 

As the Israelites conceived the world, all human concerns were 
linked immediately with the divine. Man stood in direct commun- 
ion with the deity, — a relation maintained or renewed by sacrifice. 
The approach to God by means of sacrifice implied a gift, for propiti- 
ation or in thankfulness, offered upon the altar, usually a gift of food; 
the rite ended in a feast, shared in common by the god and his wor- 
shippers. In this act was certified the deity’s acceptance of the of- 
fering, whereby his favor was vouchsafed and assured; and therefore 

197 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the solemnity of sacrifice issued in merriment and relaxation. The 
hardships of customary toil gave place to rejoicing. Whatever light- 
heartedness and imaginative fervor lay in Israel’s nature was lav- 
ished upon the ceremonies of drawing near to God. 

The occasions of sacrifice were many and various. Even the 
slaughter of an animal was a sacrificial act; a birth, the weaning of a 
child, a marriage, departure on a journey, the reception of a guest, 
were thus celebrated. The act of offering was not exclusively a func- 
tion of the priest, as in later Israel, but might be performed by the 
head of a family or the chief of a clan. In the accompanying feast 
the whole family with its dependents and guests, or all the clan, par- 
ticipated. It was in such circumstances that the youth Saul first 
met with Samuel the seer. The people that day had a sacrifice in the 
high place; and the man of God was come into the city to go up with 
them to bless the sacrifice, thus adding to the happy occasion the 
prestige of his exceptional powers. The number of those bidden to 
the feast was about thirty persons, typical perhaps of these festal 
gatherings within the village community. The rule of the feast was 
most liberal hospitality and indulgence to the limit of abundance. 
The sociability of religious observance lent a joyousness to common 
life which otherwise the resources of Israel might hardly have made 
possible. The spontaneous exuberant emotion which among other 
nations sought expression in creating forms of beauty here found 
vent in worship. 

Although sacrifice migkt be offered at any time to signalize some 
special event, certain festivals were kept by all Israel at fixed seasons. 
By far the oldest among them was the feast of the New Moon, ob- 
served immemorially when the tribes were still wanderers in the 
desert. It was essentially a family feast. Saul celebrated the day in 
the intimacy of his table-companionship, when the absence of David 
; 198 


THE KING’S PEACE 


was especially remarked; and David’s excuse was his pretended de- 
sire to join the home circle in Bethlehem. ‘Let me go, I pray thee; 
for our family hath a sacrifice in the city; and my brother, he hath 
commanded me to be there.”’ As all the members of each family or 
small clan month by month joined in the festival from generation to 
generation, the long continuity of family life received constant em- 
phasis; and the sense thus ever renewed of the closeness of the ties 
that held the members together, intensified their native pride of race. 
The feast of the New Moon, though not recognized in the later offi- 
cial religion of Israel, persisted among the people as one of their most 
cherished observances. Linked probably with the phases of the moon 
was the Sabbath or weekly day of rest. At this period the holiday 
had a different significance from that imposed upon it by the rigors 
of the priestly code of Judaism. The early legislation is concerned 
with it in its humane aspects, having little regard for the punctilious 
detail of ceremonial law. Men must abstain from labor, but in order 
that they might rest; and the Sabbath, not yet a day of scrupulous 
prohibitions, was an occasion of refreshment and ease. It suited the 
lax temper of a people in the first flush of material abundance to 
hold festival in the spirit of joyful abandon. 

The succession of feasts which accented life as the days went by 
culminated in the three great annual festivals associated with the 
harvest. Like the Canaanites in whose midst they dwelt, the new- 
comers upon the soil believed the yield of the earth and the increase 
of the flocks to be the direct gift of the deity. In a literal and wholly 
practical sense, the god was the owner, the Baal of the land; and upon 
his mood, whether favorable or adverse, depended the returns from 
the labor of men. With the Israelites, this god was Yahweh. Among 
the Canaanites, the baal was variously named. It was not until a 
later age that the prophets sharpened the distinction between Yah- 

199 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


weh and the baals. Israel said: “I will go after my lovers [the gods of 
the land] that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my 
flax, mine oil and my drink.’”” But Yahweh, by the mouth of his 
prophet, declares: ‘“‘She [Israel] did not know that J gave her the 
grain, and the new wine, and the oil, and multiplied unto her silver 
and gold.” During the early centuries, therefore, the attitude of 
peasant Israel toward its God was the same as that of the Canaan- 
ites; and in its religious procedure identified with life on the soil, 
Israel adopted the ancient customs of its neighbors. At their stage 
of culture, religion was practical rather than ethical in its conse- 
quences; moral values, so far as they were apprehended at all, were 
still quite secondary to material benefits. Accordingly the goodness 
of God, in their simple conception of it, was manifest as bounty; and 
among a farmer folk, divine bounty was bestowed supremely in the 
harvest. 

To hallow and to celebrate the progress of the harvest, the people 
held three great festivals. The Feast of Unleavened Bread marked 
the first promise of the yield to come, when the grain began to form 
into the ear. On the eve of this feast, which was known to the Israel- 
ites only after their settlement on the land, was observed the an- 
cestral Passover, the sacrifice of the firstlings of the flock. The Pass- 
over, different in origin, for it reached far back into the past of 
shepherds in the desert, was linked in practice with the agricultural 
festival of Unleavened Bread, rooted in the soil of Canaan; as both 
were observed in spring-time, at the same period and with similar 
motives, they became readily conjoined as a single occasion. Seven 
weeks later followed First Fruits, called the Feast of Harvest, to 
celebrate the ripened grain and the joys of reaping. Finally the 
swelling harvest rose to flood in the vintage, and so the festal year 
attained its climax in the jubilation of the Ingathering. It was named 

200 


THE KING’S PEACE 


the Feast of Booths; for as the people went out into the fields at the 
time of vintage and there camped under rude huts of boughs, so the 
festival itself was held at the sanctuary in like conditions. Ingath- 
ering was the chief feast of all. As grain, wine, and oil were offered 
in sacrifice, it summed up the yield of the whole year’s harvest; and 
the produce of the earth garnered and secured at last to man’s en- 
joyment, it crowned the season’s toil. It marked also the “turn of 
the year,” the end of the old year and the beginning of the new. 

The three great harvest festivals were observed by a general pil- 
grimage to a common sanctuary. In gala dress, decked with their 
nose-rings and their jewels, the people thronged to the high place. 
Each family brought to the altar its own gift of grain and wine, 
moreover flesh for the sacrifice and its attendant feast. The offering 
was due to God as tribute to the lord of the land; it was presented 
also in thanksgiving to the bestower of fertility. Such was the spirit 
of the offering, but the substance of it served no less for the delecta- 
tion of the givers. A later law provided that if the worshippers were 
not able to bring their gifts with them because the distance was too 
great, they might purchase at the sanctuary everything needful; and 
the law recognized explicitly the festive character of the occasion. 
“Thou shalt bestow the money for whatsoever thy soul desireth, for 
oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever 
thy soul asketh of thee: and thou shalt eat there before Yahweh thy 
God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou and thine household.” 

A glimpse of the vintage feast, as the Canaanites observed it, is 
caught in the story of Abimelech. ‘They went out into the field, 
and gathered their vineyards, and trod the grapes, and held festival, 
and went into the house of their god, and did eat and drink.’’ The 
manner of celebration was not different with the Israelites. It was 
to such a festival that Elkanah went up year by year with his two 

201 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


wives and his sons and daughters. Presiding over the feast, as head 
of the family, he gave to all the members their due portion; but to 
his wife Hannah, who was barren, he gave a double portion, because 
he loved her. After they had eaten and drunk, Hannah rose up to 
pray before Yahweh. Her lips moved, but she spoke no word aloud. 
The old priest, remarking her, supposed her to be overcome with 
wine, and he rebuked her, saying, “How long wilt thou be drunken? 
put away thy wine from thee.” The fact that the priest assumed 
straightway that the woman must be drunk rather than that she 
might be at prayer, illuminates the usual character of the festal 
merry-making. The success of the feast was measured by its abun- 
dance, with the corresponding incentive to hilarity. But food and 
drink were not the only entertainment. It is narrated that at the 
yearly feast, the daughters of Shiloh came out to dance in the dances, 
— swaying in rhythmic procession, whirling, or tripping a wide cir- 
cle, singing in antiphonal refrain, and ecstatically beating timbrels, 
castanets and cymbals, to the great delight and excitation of the on- 
lookers. Doubtless the sacred prostitutes attached to the ancient 
sanctuaries of Canaan played a part in the general revelry. The jubi- 
lation of Israel’s festivals is recalled by the prophet Isaiah: “ Ye shall 
have a song as in the night when a holy feast is kept; and gladness of 
heart, as when one goeth with a pipe to come unto the mountain of 
Yahweh.” And their prevailing joyousness is implied in the threat- 
ening words of Yahweh, uttered by Hosea, “I will also cause all her 
mirth to cease, her feasts, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all 
her solemn assemblies.” 

Sacrificial feasts of the family and clan, and still more the great 
popular festivals throughout the land, were the supreme oppor- 
tunities of social intercourse. The people were gathered together in 


their gayest humor. As the worshippers might buy at the sanctuary 
202 


THE KING’S PEACE 


itself what they needed for their offering and the feast, the occasion 
was also a kind of great fair or market, enlivened by the spirit of 
holiday. It may be fancied that the bleating of sheep, the lowing of 
oxen, and the cries of the vendors urged on the noisy bustle of the 
throng. In the festivities accompanying the sacrifice, food abounded, 
wine flowed copiously; the guests mingled freely, stimulated to good- 
fellowship by the cheer, and animated by a common purpose. The 
crowd-impulse held sway completely. The revelry was quickened 
further by story-telling, poetry, song, and the music of instruments. 
Ingenious riddles — such as the hero Samson loved — passing back 
and forth, and sharpening the wits, were vastly prized. In the daily 
home life of Israel, tales and poems were recited, when the people 
gathered at evening in the town gate, by the well outside the village, 
or about the shepherd’s camp-fire. But among the throngs at the 
sanctuary, the skill of the narrators and the zest of the listeners rose 
to their highest pitch. The traditions and legends of their past, at 
first merely local in their origin or application, became the treasured 
common property of all the people; told and retold year by year with 
mounting pride to the response of immense popular enthusiasm, they 
moved toward the form that was finally impressed upon them by 
writing, when the nation at length achieved a literature. Whatever 
the Israelites had of imagination or of impulse to art expression in 
narrative, dancing, and music here came to its fullest utterance. 
The influence of these festivals, therefore, upon the cultural de- 
velopment of Israel was very great. The contacts with one another 
in common worship and joyousness released the constraints of dull 
labor and roused the sensibilities to playful freedom of expression; 
and the occasion offered both incentive and opportunity. Assem- 
bled from over the land with a single general purpose, the people re- 
newed the consciousness of old tribal bonds which tended to become 
; 203 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


dissolved into the ties of place; and reaffirming thus their unity as the 
people of Yahweh amidst the alien Canaanites, they safeguarded 
their distinctive national character. The popular festivals contin- 
ued far down into history, even after worship was compressed into a 
more formal and sacerdotal mould. It is significant of the genius of 
the Israelites, as it later manifested itself, that the chief diversions 
which they enjoyed were associated with occasions of a religious im- 
port. During this early period, Israel’s conception of the divine did 
not differ fundamentally from that of other peoples at the same stage 
of culture. What distinguished this nation, however, from all its 
contemporaries was its rapid rise to ethical ideas. The unfoldment 
was effected under the guidance of the prophets. The temper of the 
people on which they wrought with sublime results revealed itself in 
its most plastic state in their festivals. 

The three harvest celebrations year by year were observed among 
the farmer folk settled for the most part in the wide regions west and 
north of Jerusalem. A festival of a local and more private kind was 
the Feast of Sheep-shearing. It was kept chiefly in Judea, home of 
the shepherds. In the spring, at the season of cutting wool, the owner 
of the flock, quitting his house in the village or town, journeyed to 
the open country where his sheep were pastured, there to oversee the 
labors of the shearing. The work finished, a firstling of the flock and 
the choicest of the wool were offered to Yahweh in thankful recogni- 
tion of his favor. Then followed feasting and carouse, doubtless with 
story-telling and rude jest; it may be imagined that tales of the pranks 
and stratagems of the wily shepherd Jacob were relished expertly by 
fellows of his craft. A typical instance of the shearing festival is the 
story of Nabal. The narrative recounts that the wealthy ranchman 
held feast like the feast of a king, and his heart was merry within him, 
for he was very drunken. Ten days later he died, whether from ex- 

204 


THE KING’S PEACE 


cess of indulgence or the shock of his wife’s free-handed dealings with 
David is not told. Likewise Absalom took advantage of the feast of 
sheep-shearing to revenge himself on his brother Amnon, when in 
the exuberance of the celebration Amnon’s heart was merry with 
wine and he was off his guard. It is only a glimpse here and there, 
revealed in passing within in the old narratives, but it discloses with 
genial unconscious directness the rougher side of Israel at work and 


play. 


Although the Israelites were a simple people, close to the earth, 
crude in their material civilization, and lacking traditions of their 
own of artistic culture, their personal intercourse was touched with 
distinction by their dignity of bearing and an elaborate courtesy of 
address. Countless examples give body and picturesqueness to the 
figures that move through the narratives: as Abraham’s reception of 
the messengers of Yahweh, Moses’ welcome to his father-in-law 
Jethro, and notably Abigail’s approach to David. ‘And when Abi- 
gail saw David, she hasted, and lighted off her ass, and fell before 
David on her face, and bowed herself to the ground. And she fell at 
his feet, and said, Upon me, my lord, upon me be the iniquity; and 
let thine handmaid, I pray thee, speak in thine ears, and hear thou 
the words of thine handmaid.”’ Not only between the great and the 
lowly but among equals, the large flowing gesture of deference came 
to voice in protestations of obsequious compliment, and the whole 
attitude was suffused with the emotionalism of their quick respon- 
sive nature. Between intimates, kisses and embraces were a cus- 
tomary salutation. Easily stirred, they made no attempt to re- 
strain a flood of weeping and loud cries. After this fashion Jacob 
drew near to his brother Esau. “And Jacob lifted up his eyes and 
looked, and, behold, Esau was coming.... And Jacob bowed him- 

205 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


self to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. 
And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck, 
and kissed him: and they wept.’”’ When David was rejoined by 
Jonathan in the field, “‘ David arose and fell on his face to the ground, 
and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and 
wept with one another, until David exceeded.” An inborn simple 
nobility was overwrought into arabesques of outward flourishes, in 
which craftiness was lighted with imagination, and a passionate tem- 
perament sought to find expression for a struggling love of form. 
Perhaps something of the proud self-consciousness of the nomad sur- 
vived in the bearing of the Israelites, but their words and gestures of 
address recall in their ostentatious humility the formulas of the 
Amarna letters. Such manners were characteristic of other oriental 
peoples of their own time; and the Israelites might quite readily have 
taken on the floridly figured mode of their new environment. How- 
ever rudimentary their conditions, they were not wanting in the little 
amenities that grace daily intercourse. 

Whatever of material culture the tribes achieved up to the time of 
the monarchy was learned from the Canaanites. Though the Is- 
raelites finally made themselves masters of the country and im- 
pressed their character upon it by force of certain qualities of spirit, 
yet in the practical arts they remained subordinate to the peoples 
whom they displaced or gradually absorbed. The civilization into 
which they entered was complex, mature and opulent. The invad- 
ers, bred to the raising of flocks in the desert, brought no technical 
skill of their own; and when settled on the land, they invented noth- 
ing. Present-day research in the soil of Canaan discloses no break of 
continuity in the transition from the ancient culture to the products 
of the Israelite occupation. So far as there is a difference, it shows a 
loss of excellence, the mere reproduction of older models, but with 

206 


THE KING’S PEACE 


inferior workmanship. Adaptation on the part of Israel was simpli- 
fied by the fact that the Canaanites, though modified by centuries of 
powerful and diverse foreign influences, were of the same race and 
cognate speech with the Hebrews. After the settlement, the two 
peoples lived a life in common, and they moved in the same circle of 
ideas. The Israelites at length won a national entity, but they owed 
their progress in cultural attainment during the early period to the 
civilization already wrought out by their kindred but cleverer prede- 
cessors in Canaan. The promise of Yahweh to Israel accorded with 
actual fact: “To give thee great and goodly cities which thou build- 
edst not, and houses full of all good things, which thou filledst 
not, and cisterns hewn out, which thou hewedst not, vineyards 
and olive trees, which thou plantedst not.” Israel reaped where it 
had not sown. 

The resources of the land were varied and sufficient, if the present 
that Barzillai the Gileadite brought to the fugitive king David may 
be taken as representative: — “beds, and basons, and earthen ves- 
sels, and wheat, and barley, and meal, and parched corn, and beans, 
and lentils, and parched pulse, and honey, and butter, and sheep, and 
cheese of kine.”’ As the Israelites, to gain their livelihood, were not 
crushed by toil, there was freedom to work in the spirit of art, had 
they felt the impulse toward beautiful forms, or possessed the skill 
to fashion them. Lacking both impulse and skill, the villagers de- 
veloped, excepting perhaps the potter, no guilds of trained workers 
in the several crafts. These came into being only after large num- 
bers of the people had begun to live in cities. A passage interpo- 
lated in the first book of Samuel, though the text is corrupt and 
the meaning obscure, offers nevertheless the suggestive comment: 
“There was no smith found throughout all the land of Israel; . . . but 
all the Israelites went down to the Philistines, to sharpen every man 

207 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


his share, and his coulter, and his axe, and his mattock .. . So it came 
to pass in the day of battle, that there was neither sword nor spear 
found in the hand of any of the people that were with Saul and Jona- 
than.” The use of bronze was known in Canaan as early as 2000 B.c.; 
iron was introduced by the Philistines about a millennium later: but 
Israel was slow to master either metal, and remained content with 
the primitive convenience of flint. Throughout the countryside 
the peasant was his own artisan. The wants of the people were 
simple and easily met. The materials of clothing, of household 
utensils and farming tools, were of their own producing or close at 
hand; field stone and clay sufficed for their rude dwellings. Of 
architecture in the sense of noble form and subsidiary adornment 
they had no vision as they had no need. Neighbors to great nations 
famed for magnificent building, they rested satisfied with mere 
shelter or defence. Solomon was the first in Israel to point the way 
to architectural enterprise; and he was obliged to summon the aid 
of foreign designers and workmen, admitting quite unabashed that 
“there is not among us any that can skill to hew timber like unto the 
Sidonians.”’ 

Some compensation for its lack of invention and ability in the 
making of beautiful things, Israel found in music and dancing and in 
devising the stuff which finally constitutes literature. From the 
beginning music seems to have played an important and intimate 
part in the people’s life. Frequent references to it occur in the oldest 
narratives, which are contemporary with events; later writers as- 
sumed as a matter of course that it was practised by the patriarchs; 
and the earliest historian quite naturally assigns a place among the 
primal forefathers of mankind to Jubal, “father of all such as handle 


the harp and pipe.’”’ Every occasion of ceremony, of rejoicing and 
grief, had its appropriate accompaniment of music. When David set 


208 


THE KING’S PEACE 


forth to bring the Ark up to Jerusalem, all the house of Israel played 
before Yahweh with all manner of instruments; and they brought up 
the Ark with shouting and with the sound of the trumpet. At King 
David’s court, to enhance the pleasures of the table, was maintained 
a company of singing men and women. Laban’s reproach to Jacob is 
mingled with regret: “Wherefore didst thou flee secretly, and steal 
away from me; and didst not tell me, that I might have sent thee 
away with mirth and with songs, with tabret and with harp>”’ The 
instruments known to the Israelites were the harp, small enough to 
be carried easily, and the lyre, the pipe, the horn for signals or alarm, 
the tabret or small drum, the timbrel or tambourine, cymbals, and 
castanets. It may be inferred that their music consisted chiefly in 
loudness and volume, almost exclusively with emphasis upon the 
rhythm; whatever melody it may have had was of the simplest, 
and harmony was unknown. Of such qualities, it was preéminently 
exciting in its effects. With the Israelites, music was not only an 
emotional stimulus; it had also, in their conception of it, a magical 
influence, the power to exorcise evil spirits and to keep away demons. 
David, playing upon his harp, soothes the melancholy of Saul by 
charming forth the spirit that possesses him; wailing and piping for 
the dead was less an expression of personal grief, for usually profes- 
sional mourners were employed, than an attempt to drive off the 
demons that might seek to enter the body. The music of instru- 
ments was seldom used alone for its own sake, but rather it served 
as the accompaniment of song and dancing. A single minstrel might 
croon his ballad to the strumming of his lyre. In chorus, the songs 
were chanted in unison, or else antiphonally, with one voice carrying 
the burden, and the chorus responding in refrain. So Miriam in- 
toned: 


Sing ye to Yahweh, for he hath triumphed gloriously! 
209 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


and the maidens, moving with rhythmic step to the beat of tam- 
bourines, answered: 

The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea! 
Out of such simple elements developed the intricate majesty and 
surging eloquence of the Psalms. 

Giving plastic embodiment to music and song, the dance was pro- 
cessional in movement, sometimes graceful, often orgiastic. Its char- 
acter may be divined from the Hebrew terms referring to it, which 
signify leaping, circling, and making merry. The quick temper of the 
people sprang to expression in violent or ecstatic gesture, which sub- 
mitted readily to organizing rhythms. Any popular celebration, a 
victory in war, the return of a hero, the observance of a festival, a 
general rejoicing, furnished the moment for a tripping file of maid- 
ens, striking their gaily trimmed tambourines, to thread the meas- 
ures of their dance, while the enthusiasm kindled by the figured steps 
and the loud beat of timbrels swept the spectators into the response 
of noisy acclaim. The Israelites of this early period were a light- 
hearted people, impetuous, loving pleasure, themselves an instru- 
ment easy to be played upon. 

Out of the forms of rhythmic expression — measured words ac- 
companied by music and the varied gestures of the dance — rose the 
beginnings of Israelite literature. With increase of skill in the ma- 
nipulation of words, song gave way to recitation; and at length nar- 
rative overflowed into the wider, less constraining reaches of prose. 
During the period of the settlement, there was current in Israel a 
considerable amount of the material of literature. But these poems, 
brief tales, and popular legends, carried by professional reciters or on 
the lips of the people, passed only as oral tradition. The art of writ- 
ing, practised in Canaan as early as the fifteenth century, was not 
employed to any extent by the Israelites probably until the reign of 

210 


THE KING’S PEACE 


David, four hundred years later. At this time it happened that the 
more stable conditions of life under the monarchy favored an inter- 
est in literature for its own sake; moreover, the consciousness of 
national unity so recently won, and pride of achievement, lent a new 
value to the old tribal traditions. Accordingly, some of the learned 
in Israel were prompted to gather the song and stories of the people, 


and to commit them to written form. 
Of the earliest literature of Israel, the Hebrew scriptures have pre- 


served but a meagre part. Only a few old songs and poems survive in 
cursory citation. The popular legends and tales wrought into the 
great narratives are mere fragments drawn from the large store ac- 
cumulated by living tradition. In written form, their deftness and 
finish are such as to indicate a long period of growth and currency. 
The art of story-telling was widely cultivated in ancient Israel with 
amazing skill; and the oral tales woven into the fibre of the written 
narratives stand out in glowing patterns of exquisite workmanship. 
The earlier writers who preserved them were sympathetic with their 
freshness and charm. The sombre zeal of priests, into whose hands 
they finally passed, could not dim their lustre. 

In its beginnings this literature was essentially a folk-literature, 
sprung from the familiar experience and big common emotions of all 
the people. The first budding of their genius, it was also an earnest 
of their quality. It reveals the Israelites, otherwise without distinc- 
tion in worldly achievement, as gifted poetically in the highest de- 
gree. What they lacked in material culture was abundantly offset by 
the wealth of their imaginative life. Not in practical affairs but in 
its literature may be traced the means by which Israel won its 
enduring gains for the spirit of man. 

Yet the few centuries in which the scriptures of Israel came into 


being were crowded with catastrophic events. 
211 


XI 
DIVIDED ISRAEL 


Sotomon, son of David the Judahite, was succeeded by his son Re- 
hoboam. The tribe of Judah, coming late and reckoned the youngest 
of Jacob’s sons, had risen swiftly to supremacy in the nation. Not 
wholly by accident had the burdens of Solomon’s prodigal reign 
fallen most heavily upon the northern tribes. Their discontent 
stirred ominously in the revolt of the Ephraimite Jeroboam, king’s 
overseer of forced labor. But the despot was too firmly placed. And 
Jeroboam fled into Egypt. 

Already the kingship in Israel was become hereditary. In view of 
the disaffection of the northern tribes, however, it was a politic act 
on the part of the new king Rehoboam to repair to their ancient city 
of Shechem, long hallowed in Ephraimite tradition, to receive their 
sanction. The tribes seized the occasion to present their grievances. 
The king’s answer was harsh and provoking. “My father made your 
yoke heavy, but I will add to your yoke. My father chastised you 
with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.’”’ Whereupon the 
old desert spirit of tribal independence cried again in furious out- 
burst: 


What portion have we in David? 

Neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse. 
To your tents, O Israel! 

Now see to thine own house, David! 


Contemptuously the king sent his overseer of the labor-gangs, not a 

popular or conciliatory personage, to intimidate the insurgents. But 

they stoned him to death. And Rehoboam, mounting his chariot, 
212 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


drove with all haste to Jerusalem. The former rebel leader, Jero- 
boam, who had now returned from Egypt, was made king over the 
northern tribes or “‘Israel.’”’ There was none that followed the house 
of David but the tribe of Judah only. Henceforth Israel and Judah 
went their divided ways, two kingdoms. 

The separation befell about the year 935 B.c. Until the overthrow 
of its capital, Samaria, and the dispersion of the ten tribes in 722, the 
chief inierest of Hebrew story lies with the northern kingdom. Its 
situation was more favored by nature than was the south for the de- 
velopment of a luxurious material civilization. Its plains yielded a 
more varied and abundant harvest than the hills of Judah; likewise 
they were more exposed to the attack of hostile nations, but also 
more open to the influences of foreign culture. This contact with 
other peoples, resulting in frequent wars, in wider trade relations, 
and the reception of ideas, lent speed and complexity to the unfold- 
ing of Israel’s genius. 

Contrasting with the fortunes of Judah, whose throne passed in 
the keeping of the house of David at Jerusalem in unbroken succes- 
sion until the exile in 586, the brief two centuries of Israel’s crowded 
history witnessed frequent changes of dynasty, attended by assassi- 
nation and sweeping massacre. Jeroboam, a really strong man, 
maintained himself as king for twenty-two years. But his son and 
successor, Nadab, after a reign of two years, was murdered by Baa- 
sha, of the tribe of Issachar, who seizing the kingly power, exter- 
minated all the house of Jeroboam. In his turn, Baasha reigned 
twenty-four years, and was succeeded by his son Elah. After two 
years Elah’s captain of the chariots, Zimri, conspired against him; 
and when the king was drinking himself drunk in the house of his 
master of the palace, Zimri slew Elah, made himself king, and exter- 
minated the house of Baasha. But violence again, in his turn, 

213 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL - 


brought his swift end. The army, in the field against the Philistines, 
proclaimed their captain Omri king. With his forces Omri laid siege 
to the capital; and when Zimri saw that his city was taken, he burned 
the king’s house over himself and perished with it, having reigned 
seven days. The triumph of Omri, however, was not complete, for 
half the people followed Tibni to make him king; but finally the 
party of Omri prevailed. Omri ruled twelve years; and three kings of 
his house succeeded him. His son Ahab held the throne twenty-two 
years, and was followed by his son Ahaziah, who after a reign of two 
years was succeeded by his brother Joram. Twelve years Joram 
reigned, and was then murdered by his army commander Jehu, who 
bloodily made himself king and proceeded to destroy all the family 
of Ahab. Jehu ruled for twenty-eight years. The dynasty that he 
founded was continued by four generations after him: Jehoahaz, 
seventeen years; Joash, sixteen years; Jeroboam II, forty-one years; 
and finally Zechariah, who after six months on the throne was as- 
sassinated by Shallum. One month only Shallum maintained him- 
self, and in turn was murdered by Menahem, who reigned ten years 
and was succeeded by his son Pekahiah. After two years he was 
slain by his captain Pekah, who ruled ten years, and then was mur- 
dered by Hoshea. Eight years later, in 722, Samaria fell to the con- 
quering Assyrians. The kingdom of Israel had run its course, and 
ceased. 

In two centuries Israel had been ruled by nine different dynasties, 
numbering nineteen kings. Always threatened, often beset and 
worsted by external foes, Israel nevertheless failed to placate its 
brother Judah, the weaker power but the rightful heir to David’s 
kingdom. The break between north and south was followed by war, 
which continued intermittently for two generations. When this 


turned in Israel’s favor, Judah sought alliance with Damascus, a 
214 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


manceuvre which accrued finally to the disadvantage of both Hebrew 
states. A truce between them was effected by the marriage of Ahab’s 
daughter with Jehoram, king of Judah; and the two kingdoms to- 
gether joined forces with the Arameans to fight against Assyria (849- 
845). In the reign of Joash, fifth king after Ahab, Israel was again at 
war with Judah. Taking captive King Amaziah in the battle at 
Beth-shemesh, Joash entered Jerusalem, broke down the northern 
wall, and carried off hostages and the treasures of the palace and the 
Temple. Half a century later, Judah, to defend itself against a com- 
bined attack of Israel and Damascus, purchased the support of 
Assyria. In little more than a decade afterwards, the northern king- 
dom succumbed to the crushing march of the Assyrian empire. It had 
been better policy throughout for Israel to stand with Judah against 
all foreign enemies. For although in the long succession of fratricidal 
wars, Israel proved itself the stronger of the two Hebrew states, 
yet division and this constant strife worked to its final overthrow. 
To the convulsive welter of domestic violence and ruinous civil 
strife were added the devastations of foreign wars. Early in the 
reign of the first Jeroboam, Egypt once again reached out to plunder 
Canaan. In the south Judah suffered the more severely; but even 
Jeroboam quit his capital at Shechem and fortified Penuel across the 
Jordan. Yet a greater danger, ever increasing, threatened from the 
north. The Aramean kingdom of Damascus, ambitious for expan- 
sion and trade, was pressing toward the sea; and Israel lay across its 
path. Already David, king over a united nation, had met the initial 
shock triumphantly. But Omri, though strong enough to conquer 
Moab, was obliged to yield some of his cities to the Arameans, 
granting them also certain rights of trade in his capital, Samaria. 
From further eastward, the crescent might of Assyria, striding forth 
from the ruins of the Babylonian empire, was thrusting toward the 
215 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


coastland, and now had so far made its way as to compel Omri to 
render tribute. His son Ahab, reénforced by alliances with the Phoe- 
nicians and with Judah, beat back new invasions of the Arameans, 
regained the cities which his father had ceded, and won for Israel 
trading rights in Damascus. Soon afterwards Ahab, commanding an 
army which numbered, according to the annals of the Assyrian king, 
two thousand chariots and ten thousand foot-soldiers, joined with 
Aramean princes against Assyria. In 854, the earliest date in Israel- 
ite chronology to be fixed by reference to external sources, a battle 
was fought at Karkar on the Orontes; even though the Assyrians may 
have drawn an uncertain victory, they relaxed their pressure on the 
westland. So swiftly flashed the shuttle of conflicting interest through 
the web of tangled policy and selfish momentary advantage that in 
the following year Ahab was again at war with the Arameans. Is- 
rael won; but Ahab, valorous in the thick of battle, paid for his cour- 
age with his life. é 
Twice again, in 849 and 845, Israel united with the Arameans to 
drive back Assyria. But these alliances availed nothing to end the 
perennial border warfare between the rival capitals of Samaria and 
Damascus. At length Assyria, profiting by the disruption and inter- 
necine strife that weakened both of the kingdoms opposed to it, suc- 
ceeded in overrunning the west, and laid King Jehu under tribute. 
Also in Jehu’s reign, again the Arameans smote Israel, this time in 
all its borders from the Jordan eastwards. Its cities were sacked, the 
men massacred, the women outraged, and the children carried off to 
slavery. Under Jehu’s son Jehoahaz, the nation suffered continually 
at the hand of the Aramean conquerors: their king made the Israel- 
ites like dust in the threshing. With Joash, son of Jehoahaz, came a 
turn of fortune. In three campaigns he recovered the cities his father 
had lost to the Arameans; and his son Jeroboam II restored all the 
216 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


border of Israel. The long reign of Jeroboam was the climax of Is- 
rael’s material greatness. Upon his death in 743, the nation plunged 
to its violent end. 

During the reign of Menahem, the third king in less than a year to 
rule after Jeroboam II, the westward march of Assyria struck again 
at Israel’s constant insecurity. By a present of one thousand talents, 
exacted from sixty thousand of his wealthy subjects, Menahem in- 
duced the enemy to withdraw. But only for a time. In the days of 
Pekah, who had slain the son of Menahem, “came Tiglath-pileser 
king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abel-beth-maacah, and Janoah, 
and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of 
Naphtali; and he carried them captive to Assyria.” At this same 
period, in the year 732, the Assyrians conquered Damascus, slew its 
king, and deported the inhabitants. The Aramean danger threat- 
ened Israel no longer. But in its place loomed the vastly more formi- 
dable menace of Assyria, which was speedily to overwhelm the en- 
feebled Israelite kingdom. 

Broken by disaster at the hand of the foreign aggressor, Pekah fell 
a victim to rebellion at home. The assassin Hoshea succeeded to the 
throne. 


Against him came up Shalmanezer king of Assyria; and Hoshea 
became his servant, and brought him presents. And the king of 
Assyria found conspiracy in Hoshea; for he had sent messengers to 
So king of Egypt, and offered no present to the king of Assyria, as 
he had done year by year: therefore the king of Assyria shut him 
up, and bound him in prison. Then the king of Assyria came up 
throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria, and besieged it 
three years. In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Assyria [Sargon 
II] took Samaria, and carried Israel away unto Assyria, and placed 
them in Halah, and in Habor, on the river of Gozan, and in the 
cities of the Medes. 


217 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


According to an inscription of Sargon, the inhabitants of Samaria to 
the number of 27,290 were deported, among them certainly most of 
the official and the wealthy classes and all the leading personages. 
Doubtless Israelite peasants remained on the land. But the Assyri- 
ans colonized the conquered territory with peoples gathered from 
other regions of the great empire. Samaria was an Assyrian prov- 
ince. Its inhabitants became a mixed people; wherefore in later cen- 
turies the Jews would have no dealings with the Samaritans. The 
kingdom of Israel was no more. The future passed to Judah. 


Amidst the alarms of incessant devastating wars and the turmoils 
of thick-coming bloody revolutions that made Israel’s history as a 
state, social conditions also were undergoing profound changes of 
form and spirit. 

The institution of the monarchy entailed a new organization of 
society, with far-reaching effects. The old tribal bonds of kinship 
had been resolved into community of interest based upon locality. 
With this different alignment came another system of administra- 
tion. More and more as the functions of the tribal elders were taken 
over by the king and his appointees, the earlier methods of represent- 
ative control yielded to government by the few. Individuals and 
families rose to positions of influence, owing their power to wealth or 
official station; and social disparities multiplied rapidly throughout 
the nation. 

These changes were not due to the king alone. For his authority, 
as confronting the strongly individualistic character of his people, 
was by no means absolute. In theory he was the chosen and an- 
ointed of Yahweh. But frequent revolutions, attended by the violent 
overthrow of the royal person, must have shaken what simple faith 
the people had in the divinity which should hedge a king. Certain 

218 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


functions were accorded the king as by right. Naturally the sov- 
ereign was chief priest and supreme judge; likewise he was com- 
mander of the army. In the ordinary course of state business the 
king decreed the taxes, and to meet extraordinary needs, he might 
levy special assessments; he was able also to compel the forced labor 
of his subjects. A comment on the kingship, as it impressed the peo- 
ple, is ascribed to the foresight of Samuel, though in fact it was 
wrung from bitter experience. 


This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: he 
will take your sons, and appoint them unto him, for his chariots, and 
to be his horsemen; and they shall run before his chariots: and he will 
appoint them unto him for captains of thousands, and captains of 
fifties; and he will set some to plow his ground, and to reap his har- 
vest, and to make his instruments of war, and the instruments of 
his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be perfumers, and 
to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your 
vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give 
them to his servants, And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of 
your vineyards, and give to his eunuchs, and to his servants. And he 
will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your good- 
liest cattle, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take 
the tenth of your flocks: and ye shall be his servants. 


Manifestly the king’s rule might be, and doubtless often was, op- 
pressive. The actual rights and duties of the sovereign, however, 
were not fixed rigidly, but depended, so far as concerned their exer- 
cise or abuse, upon the personal character of individual monarchs. 
Sometimes the king deferred to the opinion of his advisers and 
held himself responsive to the desires of his subjects. Ravening 
and unbridled rulers there were in Israel, but in general, the people 
enjoyed a measure of private freedom unknown to contemporary 
despotisms. 
219 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Since the king was obliged in practice to delegate his powers, there 
followed a great increase in the number and the functions of royal 
appointees, with consequent changes in social organization. The 
tribal system, though it vested the rule of the clan in the elders, was 
in spirit democratic, because representative; it was a rulership of the 
group by the group in its own interest. Under the monarchy, when 
government, centralized at the capital, proceeded from above down- 
ward throughout the nation, the officials of the court and their 
friends drew together into an aristocracy set off from the people. 
Honors and emoluments tended to become restricted to certain fam- 
ilies; and an individual, like Gideon or Saul or David, whose talents 
might enable him to gain position, unless he were an army officer 
supported by his troops, had little chance to rise out of obscurity. 
With the ruling caste of princes, nobles, priests, and army com- 
manders, were associated the families of the rich, allied with the aris- 
tocracy by virtue of the privileges conferred upon them by their 
wealth. So the tribal and local divisions of an earlier time, which 
allowed equality within the group, gave place to distinctions of class 
and property. Formerly the division had been vertical, separating 
one community from another. Now the lines of cleavage were hori- 
zontal: at the bottom, the mass; thence by degrees of wealth and 
station, to officials, courtiers, and the king. The consequences of 
these distinctions were the occasion and the object of the impas- 
sioned teaching of the prophets. In their plea for social justice and 
personal righteousness, the issues of morality unfolded into the high- 
est reaches of religion. 

The needs of the fast expanding kingdom of David had led the mon- 
arch to surround himself with functionaries undreamed of by the 
simple chieftain Saul. To the offices that David created, the grandi- 
ose Solomon added new posts and dignities. Over the entire nation, 

220 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


divided now into administrative departments, were set the “princes 
of the provinces,” who represented the king rather than the people. 
The tribal elders were succeeded by the elders of the city, whose au- 
thority, instead of receiving sanction from their fellows, reverted to 
royal favor. As the supreme judicial power was now vested in the 
king, and a case might be brought to him for last appeal, the local 
judges, to whom the people formerly resorted, lost their influence. 
Likewise for war, the leaders of the group under the tribal organiza- 
tion gave place to the king’s officers. Though all Israelites were lia- 
ble for service in time of need, the nucleus of the military forces was 
a standing army, in part recruited from foreigners, devoted to the 
person of the monarch; and the army commanders, as a professional 
class, were ranged on the side of the aristocracy. Identified with the 
nobles also were the court priests, who performed their duties as 
servants of the crown. In this respect they constituted an order 
distinct from the priests of the popular religion ministering at the 
ancient sanctuaries, friends of all the countryside. Subservient to 
the interests of the king, as royal officials, they lost the intimate 
contact of fellowship with the group in small communities. The class 
distinctions that centred in the capital prevailed in other cities. In 
Jezreel were ‘‘he that was over the household, and he that was over 
the city, the elders also, and they that brought up the king’s chil- 
dren.” Thus the extension and the transfer of the royal prerogatives 
gave rise to an aristocracy, which proved itself not only corrupt but 
also hostile to the welfare of the people. The governing classes, asso- 
ciated with the court and established in the cities, drew apart from 
the mass of Israelites settled upon the land. 


Life on the soil was the foundation of Israelite society. Some land 
was held in common by the group as a whole. But also the individ- 
221 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ual peasant might own his little plot of ground. Inheritance passed 
from father to son. If the owner was obliged to sell, the next of kin 
came forward to redeem it, that the patrimony might not fall into 
the hands of strangers. To the original possesser was still reserved 
the right to buy back his land. So basic was the title to individual 
possession that once the owner of a vineyard dared to refuse a king 
who coveted his ground; and the monarch was obliged to resort to 
stratagem and murder to compass his end. In practice, however, 
this fundamental right was often violated by the rich and powerful. 
Thus the prophet Micah charged: “They covet fields, and seize 
them, and houses, and take them away: and they oppress a man and 
his house, even a man and his heritage.” Israel had no system of 
tenancy of land on payment of rent, which might make possible the 
exploitation of the poor by extortionate rentals. The means by which 
the rich exercised the power that their wealth gave into their hand 
was outright expropriation, taking advantage of the poor man’s 
necessities to deprive him of his inheritance. The impoverished and 
dispossessed became hirelings or slaves. 

The owner of land worked his property by his own efforts, with 
the help of his family and of his slaves. The class of paid workers, or 
landless freemen who labored for wages, seems not to have been 
numerous. Their standing, however, was recognized and safe- 
guarded by the law. In Deuteronomy it is ordained: “Thou shalt 
not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy, whether he be of 
thy brethren, or of thy stranger-sojourners that are in thy land 
within thy gates: in his day thou shalt give him his hire, neither 
shall the sun go down upon it; for he is poor, and setteth his heart 
upon it.” The most notable instance of the hireling is Jacob, 
who served Laban twenty years for “wages.” Other examples 
are few. ) 

222 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


The place of paid workers was filled in Israel by slaves.! Their 
lot, as compared with that of the poor freeman, was not hard; nor 
according to Israelite standards, was it necessarily degraded. They 
were members of the household, and they shared in the family wor- 
ship and festivals. The maidservant usually was the concubine of 
her owner; or she might marry his son, being granted therewith full 
rights as a wife. In the work of farm and dwelling, in which every- 
one had a part, the master and his slaves met on terms of friendli- 
ness. Often they enjoyed his confidence, and were entrusted with 
important tasks. Such were Eliezer, servant of Abraham, Saul’s 
servant and companion when he set forth to find his father’s 
asses, and Ziba, servant of Meribaal. Perhaps the larger number of 
slaves were foreigners, captives in war or purchased from abroad. 
But the free Israelite also might be reduced to slavery. A father 
had the right to sell his sons and daughters, a man himself might be 
sold for debt, if unable otherwise to redeem his pledge. Thus were 
the needy sold even for a pair of shoes (Am. 8 6). The current price 
of a slave was thirty shekels. So numerous were slaves in Israel, so 
much were they an integral and important element of society, that 
the written law was greatly concerned with their welfare, amply as< 
suring the protection of their persons and their rights. Their lot was 
so far from evil or intolerable, that the law which provided for their 
release at the end of six years assumed that they might prefer to 
remain with their masters gladly of their own choice. The social in- 
justices which the prophets denounced were real and bitter, but they 
were due to individual unrighteousness. The conditions of labor as 
such permitted a liberal life. 

Though Israel remained primarily a peasant folk, the develop- 


1The Hebrew words for “slave” are translated in the English versions as 
servant.” 


223 | 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ment of trade, which received its first powerful impetus under the 
luxury-loving Solomon, drew increasing numbers to the cities. Their 
growth changed the character of Israelite society. Differences were 
sharpened. The old simplicity, the old sense of things in common, 
broke into divergent purposes. Homely content was ravaged by 
greed. Not well-being was the aim of life, but riches; and the hand 
of every man was against his brother. With trade came foreigners 
to reside, bringing with them their own customs, morals, and modes 
of worship; and their example impaired Israel’s traditional singleness 
and devotion. What the nation gained in new interests and wider 
horizons was paid with a loss of integrity. The task of the prophets 
was rendered the more necessary and the harder. 

To the cities gradually drifted the artisans. In the old days, the 
peasant contrived for himself or obtained from a neighbor workman 
such simple equipment as he needed. Finding in the city a larger 
market for a single kind of product, the artisans gave themselves 
over to specialized crafts. Workers in the same craft united into 
guilds, and dwelt together in the same quarter of the city; certain 
towns, even, were noted as the seat of some special industry. Often 
a single craft was practised by one family from generation to genera- 
tion. Many of the craftsmen in Israel were of old Canaanite descent 
or were resident Phoenicians. Of native Israelite work the quality 
was markedly inferior. Seemingly Israel had not the love of beauti- 
ful handiwork — for the fashioning of which, besides, the people 
lacked the skill. As a class the craftsmen, in common with all free 
Israelites, enjoyed complete personal independence. Their labor, 
however limited in range, was their own, subject to no external com- 
pulsions or control. 

Opportunity for enrichment, other than by possession of land, lay 
in trade. The strip of coast tenanted by Israel formed a narrow 

224 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


bridge between great empires. Since history began, caravans bear- 
ing precious metals, rare woods, spices, and fine wrought-work, filed 
its length north and south, touching the Tigris in the east, and in the 
west the long valley of the Nile. North of Israel’s territory, fronting 
the Mediterranean, rose the cities of the Phoenicians, masters of 
sea-borne trade. Tyre was the mart of nations — the harvest of the 
Nile her revenue; her merchants were princes, her traffickers were the 
honorable of the earth. And Sidon was the stronghold of the sea 
(Is. 23 3-4, 8). In this world-commerce the Canaanites and their 
Hebrew successors shared as middlemen. King Solomon, advan- 
taged by Israel’s central position, knew how to exact toll of mer- 
chant caravans for passage through his land. Moreover, the native 
products of Canaan, oil, grain, wine, honey, balsam, myrrh, pis- 
tachio nuts and almonds, might be sent forth in exchange for ar- 
ticles of luxury which other peoples had greater skill to fashion. 

In addition to this foreign commerce, which was undertaken by 
the wealthier classes, mounting even to the king himself, and which 
centred mainly in the cities, each community had its own trades- 
men, offering their wares in stalls or in the market-place of the gate. 
Perhaps the eloquent voice of a later prophet echoes the street-cry of 
the hucksters. 


Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that 
hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and 
milk without money and without price! 


Of the manner of bargaining, its formalities and elaborate but subtly 
ironical courtesies, wherein the seller’s pretended offer of his wares as 
a gift is not misunderstood by the purchaser, an episode recounted of 
Abraham furnishes a picturesque instance. 


Now Ephron was sitting in the midst of the children of Heth: and 
225 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the audience of the chil- 
dren of Heth, even of all that went in at the gate of his city, saying, 
Nay, my lord, hear me: the field give I thee, and the cave that is 
therein, I give it thee; in the presence of the sons of my people give I 
it thee: bury thy dead. And Abraham bowed himself down before 
the people of the land. And he spake unto Ephron in the audience of 
the people of the land, saying, But if thou wilt, I pray thee, hear me: 
I will give the price of the field; take it of me, and I will bury my dead 
there. And Ephron answered Abraham, saying unto him, My lord, 
hearken unto me: a piece of land worth four hundred shekels of sil- 
ver, what is that betwixt me and thee? bury therefore thy dead. 
And Abraham hearkened unto Ephron; and Abraham weighed to 
Ephron the silver, which he had named in the audience of the chil- 
dren of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current money with the 
merchant. 


It suited the temperament of the people that buying and selling, even 
of the simplest, should be a kind of ceremony, not Jacking also in ex- 
citement. And notably the great popular festivals were the occasion 
of liveliest chaffering. Merchants were notorious for sharp prac- 
tices; fraudulent balances, false weights, and scant measures were 
the rule. Much of the business remained in the hands of the Canaan- 
ites, still surviving among the Israelite population. Thus it was that 
the term Canaanite, applied by the prophets to their own people, 
signified “trader,” with something of contemptuous implication 
(Hos. 12 7; Zeph. 111). Not until after the exile in Babylon and the 
return to the homeland were the Jews preéminently a trading people. 

Settled conditions of existence, as contrasted with a life of wan- 
dering in which all members of the tribe fared and shared alike, made 
possible the acquisition of wealth by the individual. Its earlier form 
was the possession of land, which allowed the increase of cattle and 
crops. As the cities grew in numbers, as Israel entered into trade 
with other countries, there came about the accumulation of liquid 

226 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


capital. From frequent references in the law and the sermons of the 
prophets to the practice of borrowing, it may be inferred that capital 
was available for loans — at high rates of interest on the security of 
land or personal effects. The extent of private wealth, however, can 
only be guessed. The resources of the nation were continually sapped 
by the devastations of war, by tribute wrung from the vanquished 
people, by famine, and by plague. Compared with the opulence of 
older and larger states, enriched by centuries of conquest and of 
commerce, the wealth of Israel was doubtless inconsiderable. But 
contrasted with the meagre beginnings of the tribes, Israel’s present 
riches may well have seemed to the prophets immense. So Hosea: 
“And Ephraim said, Surely I am become rich, I have found me 
wealth.” And Isaiah bears witness: ‘Their land is full of silver and 
gold, neither is there any end of their treasures.”’ Howbeit, the 
prophets speak as reformers, as champions of the needy against op- 
pression by those whose wealth was made the instrument of in- 
justice. Their testimony, therefore, may not be wholly free of ex- 





aggeration. = = 

One measure of Israel’s material prosperity may be found in the 
degree of luxury to which the nation attained. When Jeroboam made 
himself king of the northern tribes, he chose for his capital the an- 
cient sanctuary city of Shechem. Later in his long reign he estab- 
lished his residence at Tirzah, celebrated afterwards in the Song of 
Songs for its beauty. Tirzah remained the royal seat of the usurper 
Baasha, of the drunken Elah, and of the conspirator Zimri, who in his 
turn was overthrown by Omri. In the seventh year of his reign, 
Omri built the city of Samaria. To purchase the hill on which 
he reared his battlements and palaces, he paid the inconsiderable 
sum of two talents of silver. The sightliness of his city proved his 
wisdom. Rising out of fat valleys, within view of the sea, command- 

227 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ing the roads northward to the plain of Jezreel, and but three days’ 
journey from Tyre, Samaria was indeed the “crown of pride of the 
drunkards of Ephraim, the flower of his glorious beauty” (Is. 28 1). 
By the time of Ahab, son of Omri, the kingdom had so grown in 
wealth and dignity that the monarch now, in addition to the capital, 
maintained a residence in the city of Jezreel, which came to rival 
Samaria as a place of royal resort. Ahab built for himself here a 
house of ivory; and the city was the scene of many terrible events. 
Samaria, however, until it fell to the Assyrians in 722, remained the 
capital of the northern kingdom. Through the countryside suffi- 
ciently were to be had the necessaries of life, and on the great estates 
abundantly. It was rather in the chief cities that wealth was con- 
verted into luxury. In the capital were the palaces of the king and 
his court, and the massive hewn-stone houses of the rich. Here cen- 
tred all the splendors and refinements of existence which the riches 
of Israel could command. 

Witness to Israel’s luxury are the prophets, — always with allow- 
ance for their reforming zeal. The king had his winter house and his 
summer house. There were beds of ivory, appointed with silken 
cushions. Especially were the banquets of the nobles the occasion of 
excess. The eating of meat was infrequent among the people; by 
immemorial custom the slaughter of an animal was a solemn act, at- 
tended with sacrifice. But heedlessly the rich ate the lambs out of 
the flock and the calves out of the midst of the stall; the guests drank 
wine from bowls, and anointed themselves with the most precious 
oils. They rose up early in the morning that they might follow 
strong drink, and tarried late into the night till wine inflamed them. 
Their loose mirth was enhanced by idle songs to the sound of the viol; 
the harp and the lute, the tabret and the pipe, were in their feasts. 
In these revellings the women too, sleek “kine of Bashan,” played a 

228 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


part; and they connived at the oppression of the poor which brought 
gain to their husbands, saying to their lords, Bring, and let us drink! 
To the vanities of life they contributed their due share. When the 
rebel Jehu on his mission of destruction was come to Jezreel, the aged 
queen-mother Jezebel, with eunuchs in the background, painted her 
eyes and tired her head before she looked out of her palace window 
to confront the intruder. What Isaiah scathingly notes of the daugh- 
ters of Jerusalem was doubtless equally true of the fine ladies of Sa- 
maria. They are haughty, and walk with outstretched necks and 
wanton eyes, mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their 
feet. But in the day of Yahweh’s judgment, “the Lord will take away 
the bravery of their anklets, and the cauls, and the crescents; the 
pendants, and the bracelets, and the mufflers; the headtires, and the 
ankle chains, and the sashes, and the perfume boxes, and the amu- 
lets; the rings, and the nose jewels; the festival robes, and the 
mantles, and the shawls, and the satchels; the handmirrors, and 
the fine linen, and the turbans, and the veils.” Seemingly Israel 
lacked nothing of modishness or modernity. 

In all this ostentatious wantonness of the capital, however, was 
something exotic, something alien to the racial temper of Israel. 
Throughout the country, the rudeness of peasant life was still touched 
with the savagery of tribal days. Frequent revolutions, bringing 
each a new monarch to the unstable throne, were attended by mur- 
der of the king and the extermination of his house. Of Menahem it is 
related that he slew all the inhabitants of Tiphsah and its borders, 
because it held out against him, and he ripped up all the women 
with child. In every instance the usurper was not of royal strain, 
but rather an adventurer from among the people, or risen to place 
in the army; his pretensions rested only in what violence and force 
he could wield. Of this ferocious temper the deeds of Jehu are a 

229 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


superlative example. Noteworthy is the fact that he was incited 
thereto by the prophet Elisha. Moreover, that the narrative ex- 
presses no condemnation of his ruthlessness, but on the contrary 
approves his zeal for Yahweh’s cause (2 K. 10 30), implies that the 
method and manner of his bloody course in no wise offended the 
public opinion of his time. Not until a century later the compas- 
sionate Hosea pronounced an adverse judgment. 

Jehu was a captain of King Joram’s army in the field against the 
Arameans. To him came a prophet, sent by Elisha, and secretly 
anointed him to be king over Israel, with the divine injunction, “Thou 
shalt smite the house of Ahab thy master, that I may avenge the 
blood of my servants, the prophets, and the blood of all the servants 
of Yahweh, at the hand of Jezebel. For the whole house of Ahab 
shall perish.” Thereupon Jehu, mounting his chariot, drove furi- 
ously to Jezreel, whither Joram had gone to be healed of wounds, 
Advised of Jehu’s coming, Joram in his chariot, accompanied by 
Ahaziah, king of Judah, went out to meet him. When they saw that 
Jehu intended mischief, both kings turned and fled. Jehu drew his 
bow with full strength and struck Joram between his arms, so that 
the arrow came out at his heart, and he sank down in his chariot. 
Then said Jehu to his captain, “Take up, and cast him in the portion 
of the field of Naboth the Jezreelite.””, King Ahaziah fled by way of 
the garden house. And Jehu followed after him, saying, “Smite him 
also in the chariot.” And they smote him. But Jehu had yet to 
reckon with the queen-mother. When Jezebel learned of the rebel’s 
murderous progress, she looked out at the palace window defiantly; 
and as Jehu entered the gate, she cried, “Is it peace, thou Zimri, 
thy master’s murderer)” 

And he lifted up his face to the window, and said, Who is on my 
side? who? And there looked out to him two or three eunuchs. And 

230 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


he said, Throw her down. So they threw her down: and some of her 
blood was sprinkled on the wall, and on the horses: and he trode her 
under foot. And when he was come in, he did eat and drink; and he 
said, See now to this cursed woman, and bury her: for she is a king’s 
daughter. And they went to bury her: but they found no more of 
her than the skull, and the feet, and the palms of her hands. 


This was but the first act of the tragedy. By the written order of 
Jehu, the king’s sons in Samaria, to the number of seventy, were 
slain, and their heads put into baskets and sent to Jezreel, where 
Jehu commanded that they be laid in two heaps at the entrance of 
the gate. Then he smote all that remained of the house of Ahab in 
Jezreel, and all his great men, and his familiar friends, and his 
priests, until he left him none remaining. Jehu had yet to secure his 
position in the capital. Not content with the massacre of Ahab’s 
entire following in Jezreel, on the way thence to Samaria he slew 
forty-two of the brothers of Ahaziah, king of Judah. Arrived at the 
capital, he smote all that remained unto Ahab in Samaria. But the 
climax of the bloody drama of Jehu’s accession to the throne of Is- 
rael was still to be enacted. Guilefully the new king caused to be 
summoned all the prophets of Baal, all his worshippers, and all his 
priests. When they were assembled in the house of Baal, so that it 
was filled from one end to the other, Jehu loosed upon them fourscore 
of his guard; and they smote them with the edge of the sword. The 
consummate murderer’s triumph was complete. For more than a 
quarter of a century Jehu kept his guilty throne; and he bequeathed 
it on his death to his sons through four generations, until there arose 
another assassin to seize it in his turn. 

In respect of cruelty, truculence, and all evil passions, Israel dif- 
fered little if at all from other nations. Yet it was this people who by 
virtue of some special endowment or power of insight first conceived 

231 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


a God of justice and righteousness, of loving-kindness and tender 
mercy. 


Like other nations, Israel was not innocent of the oppressicns 
which the strong pile upon the weak. Distinctions between rich and 
poor began so soon as the Hebrews came into private ownership of 
land. In the time of the Judges, Gideon’s family was the poorest 
in Manasseh. The outlaw David recruited a band of four hundred 
men who were in distress and debt. To point the parable rebuking 
David for his sin in the matter of Bathsheba, the prophet Nathan 
drew his metaphor from the rapacity of a rich man against a poor 
man (2 Sam. 12 1 f.). In the social changes that followed speedily 
upon the institution of the monarchy, these distinctions were de- 
fined with ever-growing sharpness as Israel widened the range of 
its activities. 

Chief among the means whereby the strong and the rich increased 
their pitiless power and arrogant wealth were the prevailing corrup- 
tion of justice and the extensive practice of lending money on 
pledge. 

Israel had no formally constituted courts of law. Cases in dispute 
were brought to the priest at the sanctuary or to the elders in the 
gate. As the judges now belonged to the aristocracy, which had de- 
veloped under the monarchy and was consciously opposed to the less 
favored masses, their decisions naturally inclined to further the in- 
terests of their own class. They judge not the fatherless, neither 
doth the cause of the widow come unto them (Is. 1 23). The right of 
the needy do they not judge (Jer. 528). Rather, they justify the 
wicked for a bribe. Herein was another source of corruption, for the 
very method of procedure enabled the judges to enrich themselves. 
It was customary for the litigant to bring a “present” to the judge; 

232 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


and the present easily became a bribe. The princes were compan- 
ions of thieves. Every one loveth bribes, and followeth after re- 
wards. So in this respect, between two contestants for judicial favor, 
the rich man inevitably had the advantage over the poor man, the 
powerful and influential over the weak and the obscure. The far- 
reaching evils of these practices were recognized in the codes of law 
and in the denunciations of the prophets. ‘‘Thou shalt not wrest the 
justice of thy poor in his cause. And thou shalt take no gift: for a 
gift blindeth them that have sight, and perverteth the cause of the 
righteous”’ (Ex. 23 6, 8; also Dt. 1619). And Amos is not alone among 
the prophets in his rebuke to those “that afflict the just, that take a 
bribe, and that turn aside the needy in the gate from his right.”” 'The 
evil inhered in the Israelite system of justice as well as in human na- 
ture. To correct it, however, the sole appeal was to the conscience of 
the judges. But the practice was too general, greed and rapacity too 
compelling in a society but lately growing rich; and conscience was 
less potent than the lure of material advantage. 

The perversion of judgment was the accomplice of other forms of 
oppression. Wealth was the instrument; the opportunity was pre- 
sented by the necessities of the poor. The privileges fell to the fa- 
vored few; the burdens rested upon the mass of common folk. Taxes 
and the system of forced labor bore most heavily on the small farmer; 
and in Israel’s continual wars, the freeman was withdrawn from his 
daily work. As it was difficult to lay by a reserve, in a moment of 
special distress the poor had no recourse but to borrow. He might 
mortgage his land, or pledge his personal belongings. In default of 
payment, the security was forfeited; and even the borrower himself 
or his children might be sold into slavery. The instance cited by Ne- 
hemiah, though of later date, is doubtless representative of condi- 


tions under the Israelite monarchy. 
233 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


There were that said, We, our sons and our daughters, are many: 
let us get corn, that we may eat and live. Some also there were that 
said, We are mortgaging our fields, and our vineyards, and our 
houses: let us get corn, because of the dearth. There were also that 
said, We have borrowed money for the king’s tribute upon our fields 
and our vineyards. ... And, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and 
our daughters to be servants [slaves], and some of our daughters are 
brought into bondage already: neither is it in our power to help it; 
for other men have our fields and our vineyards. 


Thus were the great landowners enabled to add to their estates, 
and the rich money-lenders in the cities augmented their wealth. To 
gratify their passion for power, luxury, and dissipation, riches must 
be had at any cost. With such incentives, distraint was carried 
through unpityingly. Ruthless creditors sold the righteous for silver 
and the needy for a pair of shoes. The spoil of the poor man was in 
their houses. So little was their religion an influence for justice or 
mercy that the extortioners laid themselves down beside every altar 
upon clothes taken in pledge; and in the house of their God they 
drank the wine exacted as a forfeit. The counts in the indictment 
are various and steadily cumulative. They prove that the hardships 
suffered by the people resulted not from the conditions of their labor 
but from oppression and expropriation. It was due to the injustices 
practised by the powerful that the spokesmen of Yahweh became in 
action the champions of the inarticulate poor. 

Across the murk of corrupt society in Israel the prophets flamed as 
meteors. To the classes whom they addressed they were a visitation 
of God, threatening doom; to the people, burdened, wronged, and 
voiceless, they were a portent, something beyond the dull routine of 
life, mysterious, but boding good. Yet their relation to circum- 
stances, granted their insight, was altogether natural. Drunkenness, 
sexual license, and cynical frivolity, dishonesty in business, injustice, 

234 


DIVIDED ISRAEL 


extortion, and all manner of cruel oppression were the vices imputed 
to the rulers. Yet it was precisely these conditions that gave the 
prophets occasion and material to elaborate their teaching. Against 
the dark background of great social wrongs they moulded in higher 
relief their visions of a new order: justice where before was no justice, 
righteousness tempered with mercy, as alone pleasing to the true 
God. In passionate recoil from the iniquities of their immediate 
present, they swept forward to exalted conceptions of morality and 
religion. The conditions were but the accidents of human weakness. 
The visions of the prophets were of the essence of Israel’s genius. 


XII 
JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


Tue division of the kingdom under Rehoboam determined the his- 
tory of the Hebrew nation. So far as concerned its place in world 
affairs, disunion further weakened a people at best insignificant in 
numbers. And the fact of separateness shaped the course of develop- 
ment for both Israel and Judah by intensifying their individual dif- 
ferences of environment and character. 

Of the two, Israel enjoyed the greater material advantages, in ex- 
tent of territory and natural resources. But these very advantages 
led to a speedier end of the state and a swifter moral deterioration of 
the people. Judah survived its brother kingdom by nearly a century 
and a half. Poorer and less accessible than the plains of Ephraim, the 
tablelands of the south were less exposed to the ravage of mighty na- 
tions ambitious of conquest and spoils. As compared with the con- 
tacts to which Israel lay open, life in the Judahite state was narrower 
and was concentrated within itself. The kingdom comprised virtu- 
ally but a single tribe, for it included besides Judah with its affiliated 
clans only a part of the little tribe of Benjamin. Its relative aloof- 
ness from the currents of world affairs, in contrast to the varied tur- 
moil of Israel, was sharpened in the consciousness of the people by 
the possession of a capital early established as the centre of the na- 
tion and associated with its most glorious days. Until the fall of 
Samaria, the history of Judah was not distinguished by great events. 

So long as the kingdom of Israel endured, the fortunes of Judah 
were linked with its brother state and with Damascus in shifting al- 
liance and conflict. King Asa, the grandson of Rehoboam, took all 

236 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


the silver and the gold that were left in the treasures of the house of 
Yahweh and of the king’s house, and sent them to the king of the 
Arameans, saying, “There is a league between me and thee, between 
my father and thy father: behold, I have sent unto thee a present of 
silver and gold; go, break thy league with Baasha king of Israel, that 
he may depart from me.’’ And Ben-hadad hearkened unto King Asa, 
and sent the captains of his armies against the cities of Israel. Under 
Asa’s son Jehoshaphat, Judah made peace with Israel, though as a 
dependent state. The bond was strengthened by the marriage of the 
prince Jehoram with Athaliah, daughter of Ahab. Of Jehoshaphat it 
is related with a brief finality that is the more significant because the 
irony is quite unwitting: “‘ Jehoshaphat made ships of Tarshish to go 
to Ophir for gold: but they went not; for the ships were broken at 
Ezion-geber.” And an offer of help from the king of Israel failed to 
persuade him to a second attempt. As a consequence of his alliance 
with the northern kingdom, Jehoshaphat joined Israel to fight against 
Moab, in the end unsuccessfully. The victory of Moab encouraged 
Edom to throw off its long vassalage to Judah, so that Judah lost con- 
trol of a profitable trade with Arabia. With the defection of certain 
outlying cities, the kingdom suffered a further loss of territory and 
of prestige, 

Ahaziah, son of Jehoram and Athaliah, was slain by order of the 
rebel Jehu in the hour of his triumph over Ahab’s house. The death 
of the king should have terminated the place and power of the 
queen-mother. But Athaliah, true daughter of the Phoenician Jeze- 
bel, would not yield without a struggle. By the murder of all the 
seed royal, except the infant prince Jehoash, she made herself queen 
of Judah, the only woman in Israelite history to hold the throne. 
Her reign of six years was the sole break in the absolute succession of 
the line of David. 

237 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


By violence Athaliah seized the throne, by violence she met her 
end. The priest Jehoiada, whose wife, a sister of the late king, had 
hidden the infant Jehoash and kept him in the Temple precincts, 
brought forward the little prince, now seven years of age, and pro- 
claimed him king. By manipulating the armed forces whose func- 
tion was to guard the Temple and the palace, Jehoiada caused Atha- 
liah to be slain. The reckless bloodshed that Athaliah initiated and 
that afterwards recoiled upon herself was the first instance of dy- 
nastic murder in Judah’s history through a period of nearly a cen- 
tury, in striking contrast to continual revolution in Israel. 

Of the forty-year reign of Jehoash the Book of Kings records only 
that he repaired the Temple; that in order to avert an attack upon 
Jerusalem by the Arameans, he delivered to their king Hazael of 
Damascus all the gold of the Temple and palace treasuries together 
with all the sacred vessels; and finally that he perished at the hand of 
certain of his servants who conspired against him. The motive of the 
conspiracy is not clear, for the murdered king was succeeded, with- 
out comment in the narrative, by his son Amaziah. So soon as the 
throne was secured to him, the new monarch put to death the serv- 
ants who had slain his father. In some measure Amaziah restored 
the lost power of his kingdom, for he won a decisive victory over 
Edom, which had thrown off the Judahite yoke half a century before. 
But he proceeded to forfeit more than he had gained, for emboldened 
by his success, he challenged Israel to battle. At Beth-shemesh of 
Judah, he was put vastly to the worse: his army was routed and he 
himself was captured; the enemy broke into Jerusalem and de- 
spoiled it. Amaziah outlived the victorious king of Israel fifteen 
years; then like his father, he was slain by conspirators. The exam- 
ple set by Athaliah, daughter of Israel and Phoenicia, was bearing 
fruit in Judah. 

238 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


It is related that “all the people of Judah took Azariah, who was 
sixteen years old, and made him king in the room of his father Ama- 
-ziah.” Possibly the conspiracy to which Amaziah had fallen a vic- 
tim, unlike the plot of Jehoash’s servants, was a popular uprising in 
protest against the misfortunes the monarch had brought upon his 
kingdom. But especially significant of the democratic form and 
temper of the Hebrew nation is the fact that the succession of the 
legitimate heir to the throne was accomplished at the behest of the 
people. 

Azariah reigned fifty-two years. The Book of Chronicles, which 
names him Uzziah, credits him with many wise measures to enhance 

the strength and well-being of the diminished kingdom he had in- 
herited. He fortified Jerusalem with towers; and he made engines, 
invented by skilful men, to be on the towers and upon the battle- 
ments, wherewith to shoot arrows and great stones. He built towers 
‘in the wilderness, and hewed out many cisterns, for he had much cat- 
tle; in the lowland also, and in the plain: and he had husbandmen and 
vinedressers in the mountains and in the fruitful fields. Moreover, 
he recruited an army of 307,500 fighting men; and the officers num- 
bered 2600. For all the host he prepared shields and spears and hel- 
mets and coats of mail and bows and stones for slinging. He warred 
against the Philistines, broke down the walls of their cities, and 
built other cities in their country; he fought the Arabians, and laid 
the Ammonites under tribute; and his name spread abroad even to 
the entrance of Egypt (2 Chron. 26 6-15). Doubtless there is some 
slight basis of fact in this late chronicle; in passing, it affords pic- 
turesque glimpses of Judah’s manner of life. The Book of Kings re- 
cords that Azariah built Elath and restored it to Judah. Thus the 
kingdom regained control of trade by way of the Red Sea. 

From long years in shadow Judah emerged into half-lights of pros- 

239 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


perity, which seemed to catch something of the afterglow of Solo- 
mon’s splendor. The words of the prophet Isaiah, whose call came to 
him in the year that king Uzziah died, reveal the heightened impor- 
tance which Judah’s new contact with world affairs brought to the 
little kingdom. The people are filled with customs from the east, and 
are soothsayers like the Philistines, and they strike hands with the 
children of foreigners. And their land is full of silver and gold, nei- 
ther is there any end of their treasures; their land also is full of 
horses, neither is there any end of their chariots. Their land also is 
full of idols. But there shall be a day of Yahweh upon all that is 
proud and haughty, and upon all that is lifted up; upon every lofty 
tower, and upon every fortified wall, and upon all the ships of 
Tarshish, and upon all pleasant imagery. 

The reign of Azariah was contemporaneous with that of Jero- 
boam II of Israel. The length of each reign spanned more than a 
generation, falling in the first half of the eighth century. At this 
period both kingdoms attained a position of power and prosperity 
from which they speedily declined and which they never reached 
again. Damascus, repulsed by Joash of Israel and his son Jeroboam, 
had withdrawn its armies from the westland. Assyria was not yet 
come in force. 

King Azariah, smitten with leprosy in his old age, yielded his place 
to his son Jotham, who judged the people of the land. Jotham’s 
reign of sixteen years, as regent and as king, is distinguished in the 
narrative only by the incident that he built the upper gate of the 
house of Yahweh. His son and successor Ahaz, who reigned sixteen 
years, played a more significant, though an inglorious, part. Be- 
sieged in Jerusalem by Rezin king of Damascus and Pekah of Israel, 
he defended his capital successfully, but he was obliged to cede to 
the Arameans the port of Elath, which his grandfather had won for 

240 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


Judah. Feeling his sole strength unequal to his two enemies, Ahaz 
sent messengers bearing treasures to Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria; 
and in terms that recall the phrases of the Amarna letters, seven cen- 
turies before, he humbly besought his aid. “I am thy servant and 
thy son: come up and save me.” In response to this appeal, which 
fell in with his own purposes of conquest, the Assyrian attacked 
Damascus, captured the city, and slew Rezin its king (732). For 
the moment Judah escaped the peril of its foes from the north, yet 
Ahaz had still to fight his southern neighbors, but with ill success. 
Upon the triumph of Assyria, Ahaz went in person to Damascus to 
present himself as a vassal before Tiglath-pileser. There he saw an 
altar which so impressed him that he sent to his priest in Jerusalem 
the fashion and the pattern of it, according to all the workmanship 
thereof, with command to rear its duplicate in his own capital. 
Whatever the act signified for Ahaz, it symbolized concretely the 
opening of Judah to foreign influences in religion and culture, to 
which the little nation, contrary to its old proud sense of exclusive- 
ness, had long been yielding under pressure and to which it finally 
succumbed. 

Ahaz, weak-willed and perverse, impaired enormously the re- 
sources and political advantage of the kingdom that had descended 
to him from his wise grandfather Azariah. Partly in consequence of 
his policy, his son and successor Hezekiah was confronted with grave 
problems of statecraft. But other circumstances contributed to his 
difficulties; for increasingly Judah was swept from its remoteness 
into the conflicts of petty states struggling to maintain their inde- 
pendence, as the tide of Assyrian conquest surged westward and 
southward into Egypt. 


The tide, which now threatened to engulf Judah, was nearing its 
241 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


flood. Though irresistible as it culminated, it had been slow in com- 
ing. For nearly two centuries Assyria had on occasion intervened ac- 
tively in the westland by right of might. Its justification was its 
power to do so; its motive was lust of conquest and spoils. But already 
before this period, the great empire had a long history. Early in the 
second millennium, as the ancient majesty of Babylonia declined under 
its kings of alien Kassite strain, the territory to the north along the 
Tigris river, held by a people of kindred race and language with the 
Babylonians, and heirs to their culture and religion, became the 
dominant state. After Assyria through several centuries had finally 
established its independence of Babylonian control, the new king- 
dom reached out to conquer. About 1300 Adadnirari I annexed ter- 
ritory toward the west and assumed the title “King of the World.” 
His son Shalmaneser I, crossing the headwaters of the Euphrates, 
laid the country under tribute. Tiglath-pileser, about 1100, having 
received from his god Ashur the command to extend the boundaries 
of his kingdom, pushed on to the land of the Hittites and the “upper 
sea of the setting sun.”” Then followed for Assyria two centuries of 
lapse and obscurity, while new peoples and states rose to power in 
the west, — notably the Aramean kingdom of Damascus, the Phoeni- 
cian cities, the Philistines, and the Hebrews. Early in the ninth 
century the colossus stirred again. Ashurnazirpal III compelled 
tribute from Phoenicia and northern Syria; and his son Shalmane- 
ser II struck at Damascus. In the battle of Karkar, 854, Assyria 
was checked for the moment by the Arameans, allied with the kings 
of eleven other peoples, among whom was Ahab of Israel. But the 
great empire returned to the attack persistently. Ahab’s successor 
on the throne of Israel, the murderer Jehu, was forced to pay tribute. 
However, Assyria suffered reverses, for it had to fight also in the 
east, the south and the north. During the first half of the eighth 
242 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


century, the aggressor had so far withdrawn from the west as to 
make possible for the two Hebrew states the prosperous reigns of Jer- 
oboam II of Israel and Azariah of Judah. 

A rebellion at the capital Nineveh placed a general of the army on 
the Assyrian throne. The new king, assuming the name Tiglath- 
pileser III, proceeded to restore and augment the diminished terri- 
tories of the empire. A campaign in the west brought Syria once 
more under control; Menahem of Israel paid tribute. Pekah, who 
made himself king of Israel by the murder of Menahem’s son, joined 
with Rezin of Damascus to attack Judah. Its youthful king Ahaz ap- 
pealed to Assyria. Then came Tiglath-pileser and took... “‘ Gilead 
and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and he carried them captive to 
Assyria.” Pekah’s successor paid tribute. In 732 Damascus fell to 
the invader. Among thestates which the conqueror laid under tribute 
were Pheenician cities, Ammon, Moab, Edom, and certain kingdoms of 
Arabia. On the horizon of Israel and Judah the menace of Assyria ex- 
panded as an ever-swelling cloud, charged with portents of destruction. 

The two small Hebrew states had little to gain and everything to 
lose by contact with the ambitious, devouring empire. The culture 
of Assyria was inherited from Babylonia; and the older empire a 
millennium before had impressed its civilization upon the west. In 
the seventh century, indeed, vassal Judah aped the manners of its 
conquerors, but to the detriment of the old Israelite simplicity, and 
adopted their gods and modes of worship in utter infidelity to Yah- 
weh. The national character of the Assyrians, directed by the sus- 
tained policy of its kings, compelled the state to its course of terri- 
torial expansion, at the cost of peoples it subjected to its ruthless 
power. Assyria was primarily, if not wholly, a military nation. Its 
chief divinity, Ashur, was god of war. The king habitually took the 
field in person. Significantly, the national love of blood-letting was 

243 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


exemplified in the favorite pastime of the kings; many of their in- 
scriptions celebrate their prowess as hunters of big game. The armies 
were recruited from the native peasantry, until the conquered peo- 
ples were numerous enough to furnish soldiers for the imperial cam- 
paigns. The artisans and the merchants of the cities were of foreign 
strain; fine work and articles of luxury were the spoils of the nations 
subjected to tribute. The great armies of foot troops, equipped with 
spear and bow, were reénforced by cavalry and chariots, and sup- 
plied with huge engines for the assault of beleaguered towns. If en- 
emies dared to resist the formidable legions of the Great King, terror 
was intended to strike their hearts by practices of extreme cruelty. 
Thus Ashurnazirpal III (885-860) records: 


With battle and slaughter I assaulted and took the city. Three 
thousand warriors I slew in battle. Their booty and possessions, 
cattle, sheep, I carried away; many captives I burned with fire. 
Many of their soldiers I took alive: of some I cut off the hands and 
limbs; of others the noses, ears, and arms; of many soldiers I put out 
the eyes. I reared a column of the living and a column of heads. I 
hung up on high their heads on trees in the vicinity of their city. 
Their boys and girls I burned up in the flame. I devastated the city, 
dug it up, in fire I burned it; I annihilated it. 


The kingdom grew to empire and gained fabulously in wealth by a 
threefold procedure according to circumstances: by the direct an- 
nexation of territory, by acquiring spheres of influence, and by ex- 
tortion of enormous and crushing tribute. In the administration of 
subject regions, Assyria devised a new system of control. Resident 
governors responsible to the king were stationed in conquered dis- 
tricts to enforce loyalty to their overlord and to ensure payment of 
the required tribute as it came due annually. Further to break pos- 
sible resistance to the Assyrian rule, the native populations were de- 

244 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


ported in large numbers, and the territories were settled by alien 
colonists from other parts of the empire. As the organization of the 
state in its farthest ramifications for purposes of war made Assyria 
the greatest power of offence, so its sole policy of conquest sup- 
ported by its system of imperial administration made it a most 
potent agent of destruction in trampling down the independence of 
small nations, with no compensating advantage to their own culture. 
The Hebrew states really profited by their contact with Assyria, only 
in so far as their men of vision were able to draw deeper spiritual 
meanings out of material disaster. Other empires which had invaded 
the coastland brought benefits in their train. So Babylonia and 
Egypt, creative, intellectual, skilled in the arts, were civilizing forces. 
Assyria, on the contrary, materialistic and unsparing in its brutal 
might, was a scourge. 


Tiglath-pileser’s successor Shalmaneser IV, after subduing Phoeni- 
cia, laid siege to Samaria, because he found that Hoshea of Israel was 
conspiring with Egypt against him. Shalmaneser reigned, however, 
but five years. A few months after his death, in 722, Samaria was 
taken by Sargon II. 

The threat to Judah was drawing nearer. Hezekiah, son of Ahaz 
who had obsequiously paid court to the Assyrian monarch, ascended 
the throne. At this moment conditions seemed to favor a new 
policy in the westland, — rebellion against imperial rule and resist- 
ance to its further pretensions. Sargon was engaged in the east, 
quelling revolt in Babylonia. Already in the city states of Syria 
and Canaan, certain groups, in order to check Assyria, were ad- 
vocating an alliance with Egypt. The empire of the conquering 
Pharaohs had long since disintegrated, and the several districts were 
dominated by Ethiopia; now such rulers as were able to shape Egyp- 

245 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


tian policy were in self-defence intriguing in Canaan to stem the As- 
syrian tide. But Sargon proved himself master of the situation. In 
two campaigns he punished the rebellious cities of Phoenicia, Canaan, 
and Philistia, defeated the Egyptians at Raphia, subdued Edom and 
Moab, exacted tribute from Arabian chieftains, and so reéstablished 
his authority throughout the westland. 

In 705 Sargon was succeeded by Sennacherib. Again the change 
of monarchs, with its attendant problems of maintaining sovereignty 
in the provinces near at home, furnished occasion for uprisings in 
the west. Sidon in Pheenicia and the Philistine cities of Ashkelon and 
Kkron revolted. The people of Ekron deposed their king Padi, who 
favored Assyria, and delivered him in chains to the custody of Heze- 
kiah. Even from far-distant Babylonia, the Chaldean adventurer 
Merodach-baladan, who more than once had grasped the throne of 
Babylon from the Assyrian suzerain and again aspired to independ- 
ent rule, sent emissaries to Jerusalem to incite resistance to the com- 
mon oppressor. Whether the mission came earlier or later in Heze- 
kiah’s reign, it shows how closely involved were the wide-reaching 
relationships of the eastern world. Contrary to the warnings of the 
prophet Isaiah, the Judean king had yielded to the Egyptian party 
at his capital, and joined the insurgents. Sennacherib appeared in 
the west, reduced the Phoenician cities, defeated the Egyptians at 
Eltekeh, restored his authority in the cities of Philistia, and com- 
pelling the release of Padi at the hand of Hezekiah, placed him again 
on the throne of Ekron. The Assyrian then turned to punish Judah. 
Sennacherib thus records his doings: 


As for Hezekiah of Judah, who had not submitted himself to my 
yoke, forty-six strong towns, fortresses, and smaller towns in their 
circuit which are innumerable, by destruction through battering 
rams, and advancing of siege engines, assault ... I besieged, I cap- 

246 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


tured; 200,150 men, young and old, male and female, horses, mules, 
asses, camels, oxen, and flocks without number I brought forth from 
their midst, I reckoned as spoil. Himself like a bird in a cage in the 
midst of Jerusalem, his royal town, I shut; ramparts around him I 
drew; those who came forth from the gateway of his town I caused to 
return. His towns which I had plundered I separated from his land, 
and gave them to Mitinti king of Ashdod, Padi king of Amkarruna 
[Ekron] and Zil-bel king of Haziti [Gaza], and so diminished his land. 
To their former tribute their yearly gift the payment due to my rule 
I added [and] imposed it upon them. Hezekiah himself the dread of 
the splendor of my rule overpowered. The Urbi [Arabians] and his 
faithful soldiers which he had introduced to strengthen Jerusalem 
his royal town laid down their arms. Along with 30 talents of gold, 
800 talents of silver, precious stones of value, large lapi-lazuli stones, 
ivory couches, ivory seats, elephant-hide, ivory ... wood, urkarinnu 
wood, all kinds of valuable treasure, and his daughters, his palace 
wives, male and female musicians he caused to be brought after me 
into Nineveh my royal town; and he sent his [mounted] envoy to 
present tribute and to render homage. 


The Hebrew narrative confirms and supplements the inscription 
of the Assyrian king. Sennacherib, having reduced many of the forti- 
fied towns of Judah, was besieging Lachish, not more than thirty 
miles distant from Jerusalem. King Hezekiah, coerced by the over- 
whelming march of the invader and the menace to his own capital, 
offered submission and paid tribute. “I have offended; return from 
me: that which thou puttest on me I will bear.” To fulfil the pay- 
ment of thirty talents of gold and three hundred talents of silver, he 
cook all the silver in the Temple and the treasures of the palace, and 
was constrained to cut off the gold overlaid on the Temple doors and 
pillars. Lachish fell; and Sennacherib proceeded to the assault of 
Libnah. Meanwhile the Egyptians, to aid their hard-pressed allies of 
Philistia and Judah, advanced into the coastland, only to meet defeat 

247 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


at Eltekeh. The Assyrians, though victorious, were not secure with 
the strong fortress of Jerusalem threatening their flank or rear. Al- 
ready Hezekiah had set in order its defences, which had long suffered 
damage and neglect. He replenished the store of weapons in the 
royal arsenal. He repaired the many breaches in the fortress walls. 
Within and without the city he demolished houses to reénforce the 
ramparts and to clear the field for fighting. By building a reservoir 
between the two walls, he provided a supply of water in case of siege. 
(Is. 22 8-11) The measures of precaution proved to be well taken. 

The siege followed. Not satisfied with such submission as Heze- 
kiah had rendered by protestation of fealty and payment of tribute, 
Sennacherib “broke the covenant”’ and sent a great army to invest 
Jerusalem. With the forces were the Tartan or general-in-chief, and 
two other officials, the Rabsaris and the Rabshakeh, who were 
charged with a diplomatic mission. The Assyrian legates were met 
outside the walls by three deputies of King Hezekiah. Then ensued 
a colloquy in the best manner, dramatic, florid, yet with a keen sense 
of realities, adroitly blending grandiloquence and subtlety. The 
Rabshakeh addresses the Judahites: 


Say ye now to Hezekiah, Thus saith the great king, the king of As- 
syria, What confidence is this wherein thou trustest? Thou sayest, 
but they are but vain words, There is counsel and strength for the 
war. Now on whom dost thou trust, that thou hast rebelled against 
me? Now, behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed, 
even upon Egypt; whereon if a man lean, it will go into his hand and 
pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt unto all that trust on him. But 
if ye say unto me, We trust in Yahweh our God: is not that he, whose 
high places and whose altars Hezekiah hath taken away [thus citing 
the king himself as witness against his own cause], and hath said to 
Judah and Jerusalem, Ye shall worship before this altar in Jerusalem? 
Now, therefore, I pray thee, give pledges to my master the king of 

248 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


Assyria, and I will give thee two thousand horses [adding a master- 
stroke of ironical contempt], if thou be able on thy part to set riders 
upon them. How then canst thou turn away the face of one captain 
of the least of my master’s servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for 
chariots and for horsemen? Am I now come up without Yahweh 
against this place to destroy it? Yahweh said unto me, Go up 
against this land, and destroy it. 


Writhing under the lash of this insolent irony, and shocked by the 
impious play with the name of Yahweh, the Judahites interrupt: 


Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Aramean language; for 
we understand it: and speak not with us in the Jews’ language, in the 
_ears of the people that are on the wall. 


But the Rabshakeh continues with rising scorn: 


Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak 
these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit on the wall [who 
will be forced as a result of the siege] to eat their own dung, and to 
drink their own water with you? 


Whereupon the Rabshakeh, going over the heads of the royal depu- 
ties, addresses the populace gathered on the wall. The accomplished, 
many-languaged diplomat, conscious of his mastery, cries out in a 
loud voice, speaking Hebrew: 


Hear ye the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. Thus saith 
the king, Let not Hezekiah deceive you; for he shall not be able to 
deliver you out of his hand: neither let Hezekiah make you trust in 
Yahweh, saying, Yahweh will surely deliver us, and this city shall 
not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria. Hearken not to 
Hezekiah: for thus saith the king of Assyria, Make your peace with 
me, and come out to me; and [as contrasted with conditions in case of 
siege] eat ye every one of his vine, and every one of his fig-tree, and 
drink ye every one the waters of his own cistern; until I come and 
take you away to a land like your own land, a land of corn and wine, 


249 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


a land of bread and vineyards, a land of olive-trees and of honey, 
that ye may live, and not die: and hearken not unto Hezekiah, when 
he persuadeth you, saying, Yahweh will deliver us. Hath any of the 
gods of the nations ever delivered his land out of the hand of the king 
of Assyria? Where are the gods of Hamath, and of Arpad? where are 
the gods of Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivvah? have they delivered 
Samaria out of my hand? Who are they among all the gods of the 
countries, that they have delivered their country out of my hand, 
that Yahweh should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand? 


But the people held their peace, and answered him not a word; for 
the king’s commandment was, Answer him not. Then the deputies 
came to Hezekiah with their clothes rent, and told him the words 
of the Rabshakeh. At their report the king was panic-stricken, and 
sent for counsel to Isaiah. The prophet returned this assurance: 
“Thus saith Yahweh, Be not afraid of the words that thou hast 
heard, wherewith the servants of the king of Assyria have blas- 
phemed me. Behold I will put a spirit in him, and he shall hear 
tidings, and shall return to his own land.” 

The prophecy was fulfilled. Sennacherib suddenly withdrew his 
forces from Canaan. Perhaps more serious disturbances in the east 
required his presence at home. Or his armies may have been smitten 
with a pestilence. In the result, Jerusalem was saved (701). 

For a moment the relation of Judah to the great turmoil seething 
around the little kingdom emerges into clear light. The inscriptions 
of the Assyrian monarchs of this period recite their achievements in 
satisfying detail. Even a Greek historiographer, two centuries later, 
catches a glimpse of the passing of Sennacherib (Herodotus, IT, 141). 
The Hebrew narrative dealing with the reign of Hezekiah becomes 
exceptionally full concerning political affairs. Finally the proph- 
ecies of Isaiah vividly reveal persons in action and events in the mak- 
ing, and they picture with instant liveliness the reaction of Jerusalem 

250 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


to the crisis. The abundance of material which illuminates this 
epoch excites regret at the meagre remains that have survived as sole 
memorials of the troubled fortunes of Israel and Judah. Compared 
with the dramatic force of these chapters of history and prophetic 
eloquence, the Hebrew Book of Kings for the most part seems but a 
mosaic pieced together out of fragments, and these fragments ap- 
parently not the most significant that might have been gathered. 

Toward the end of the eighth century, Judah by exception rose to 
leadership in the politics of Canaan. Hezekiah “smote the Philistines 
unto Gaza and the borders thereof.’ That he exercised a kind of 
suzerainty over the cities of Philistia may be inferred from the fact 
that the Ekronites entrusted their deposed king to his keeping. Ju- 
dah was in close contact, whether friendly or hostile, with Egypt, 
Edom, Moab, Arabia, the Phoenician cities, the kingdom of Damas- 
cus, and the empire of Assyria. The little fortress-capital nested in 
the Judean hills was a meeting point for emissaries from the far cor- 
ners of the earth, from Babylon in the east to Ethiopia in the distant 
south. Inevitably these contacts influenced the manners and morals 
of the people. 


Hezekiah was succeeded by his twelve-year-old son Manasseh, who 
reigned fifty-five years. The half-chapter in the Hebrew narrative 
devoted to this long span records only the conduct of the king in 
matters of religion. The young monarch proved recreant to the old 
faith and the pure worship of the religion of Yahweh. He built altars: 
for all the host of heaven. He made his son to pass through the fire, 
and practised augury, and used enchantments, and dealt with them 
that had familiar spirits, and with wizards. Already in Judah the 
example of Assyria had prevailed. Ashur, whose cruel legions were 
grinding the earth to his feet, was mightier than Yahweh, whose peo- 

251 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ple were cowering in mortal fear. The glittering lewd customs of the 
east had triumphed over the simple ancestral ways. Then came the 
terrible anxieties of these cumulative years. The menacing Assyrian 
advance, on, on, to the very gates of Jerusalem, found a sudden re- 
lease in miraculous deliverance. Revealed anew by the mouth of 
Isaiah his prophet, Yahweh had shown himself powerful, — for a 
moment. But the tension had been too great: nerves snapped; and 
the reaction was extreme. The people again abandoned themselves 
to license and the evil practices that had long since gained the upper 
hand. The champions of Yahweh were forced into retreat by fa- 
natic persecutions. Manasseh shed innocent blood very much,,.till he 
had filled Jerusalem from one end to another. Compelled to silence, 
yet the true leaders and teachers of the people were not inactive. 
But their opportunity was not yet come. 

Of Manasseh’s son Amon, when he succeeded to the throne, it is 
told that he walked in all the ways of his father. After he had reigned 
but two years, he was slain by his own servants. But the people of 
the land slew all them that had conspired against King Amon, and 
they made his son Josiah king in his stead. It is possible that the 
servants of Amon who conspired against him were prompted by zeal 
for the old religion, which had suffered so grievously; when they 
found that any hopes of reform they had placed in the new king were 
disappointed, they murdered him in revenge for the persecutions in- 
flicted by his father. Amon may have been a favorite with the people 
because he proved as indulgent as his predecessor toward their licen- 
tious worship; and so in their turn, they avenged themselves on the 
murderers of Amon. The prince Josiah, whom the people raised to 
the throne, was only a boy of eight years, as yet untried; and they 
may have expected to hold him to their cause. 

For seventeen years Judah went its way unchanged. Then hap- 

252 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


pened at Jerusalem an event which smote the little kingdom like 
tempest and earthquake. The forces that broke convulsively upon 
the nation had been gathering silently underground. Apostasy tri- 
umphant had persecuted but could not crush utterly the champions 
of Yahweh; and biding their time, they plotted a counterstroke. 
With overwhelming suddenness, their success was immediate and 
complete. . 

It isrelated that King Josiah sent Shaphan his scribe to Hilkiah, 
the high priest, with directions concerning the repair of the Temple. 
Abruptly, without explanation of the circumstances, the narrative 
continues: “And Hilkiah the high priest said unto Shaphan the 
scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of Yahweh. 
And Hilkiah delivered the book to Shaphan, and he read it. And 
Shaphan the scribe came to the king, and said, ... Hilkiah the 
priest hath delivered me a book. And Shaphan read it before the 
king. And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the 
book of the law, that he rent his clothes.”” Thereupon the king, to 
inquire of Yahweh concerning the book, sent Hilkiah and Shaphan 
with three others, not to the Temple, but to a prophetess, Huldah, 
wife of the keeper of the wardrobe. The answer which the prophet- 
ess returned to the king was compounded of threat and promise. 
Yahweh would bring evil upon the nation, even as the book declared; 
but the king, because his heart was tender and he humbled himself 
before Yahweh, would be spared the sight of the evil that impended, 
and he would be gathered to his grave in peace, — a prophecy which 
was not fulfilled. When he heard the report of his messengers, Josiah 
summoned his subjects to appear before him, the elders, the priests, 
and the prophets, and all the people, both small and great; and he 
read in their ears all the words of the book of the covenant. Then the 
king pledged himself solemnly to walk after Yahweh, and to keep 

253 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


all his commandments as set forth in the book; and all the people 
stood to the covenant. 

Forthwith the king proceeded to give effect to the prescriptions of 
the Book of the Law. He purged the Temple of all the paraphernalia 
of heathen worship, burning the vessels and the Ashera. He took 
away the horses that the kings of Judah had given to the sun, at the 
entrance of the Temple, and he burned the chariots of the sun. The 
altars that were on the roof of the upper chamber of Ahaz, and the 
altars which Manasseh had made in the two courts of the house of 
Yahweh, did the king break down; and he destroyed the houses of the 
sodomites in the Temple precincts, where the women wove hangings 
for the Ashera. Thence outward, he defiled Topheth, in the valley of 
Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass 
through the fire to Molech; and likewise he defiled the high places, 
outside the city, that Solomon had built for the gods of Sidon, Moab, 
and Ammon. Destroying thus the symbols and equipment of hea- 
thenism, he moved also to suppress the personnel. “He put down 
the idolatrous priests whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn 
incense in the high places in the cities of Judah, and in the places 
round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to 
the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of 
heaven.” “Moreover them that had familiar spirits, and the wizards, 
and the teraphim, and the idols ... did Josiah put away.” 

The Book of the Law, which proved so cataclysmic for the popu- 
lar worship, is now comprised in chapters 12 to 26 (or 5 to 26) and 
part of chapter 28 of the Book of Deuteronomy. It was the work of 
a group of zealous men, writing in the prophetic spirit, who devised 
this method of appeal to the national heart and will, when other 
means of persuasion or constraint had signally failed. The impas- 
sioned deeds of prophets like Elijah and Elisha had not availed to 

254 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


save the northern kingdom. Unheeded, the flaming summons to re- 
pentance and righteousness voiced by rapt preachers like Amos, 
Hosea, and Micah, like Isaiah, whose lips were touched by a glowing 
stone from off the altar of his vision, seemed to have flickered into 
silence. To restore the people of Yahweh to their appointed course, 
to recall the nation to its ancestral loyalties, required a new mode of 
address, supported by compelling authority and charged with the 
utmost potency of incitement. The attack, conceived in the shad- 
ows of persecution and matured in secrecy, when the moment came 
was launched with instant success. Emerging suddenly from mys- 
terious obscurity into the light reflected from the throne, the Book of 
the Law straightway commanded full acceptance by king and people. 

The reform was fraught with immense consequences for the na- 
tional culture. In the name of Moses, hallowed in tradition as Is- 
rael’s supreme lawgiver, the Book of the Law, “found” in the Tem- 
ple, designated Jerusalem as the single exclusive sanctuary of the 
nation. This rigid centralization of worship tended to constrict still 
further a people at best small and intolerantly self-conscious, and to 
stamp it with a single impress; moreover the assault upon all foreign 
cults rewakened in Israel its sense of separate and peculiar destiny. 
In some aspects a definite gain for religion, this drift toward concen- 
tration represented a loss in the range of popular interests. What- 
ever of variety may have gladdened the people in their spontaneous 
rites at the local sanctuaries received a sobering cast from the impos- 
ing shadow of the Temple. As the trivial acts of every day were di- 
vested of religious import, for only at Jerusalem might men sacrifice 
and rejoice before Yahweh, so religion became specialized and more 
remote from workaday affairs. For the intimacy of free communion 
close at home, the reform substituted the burdensome complexities 
of a more elaborate ritual in distant Jerusalem. The familiar priest 

259 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


of the little neighborhood gave place to the unknown official func- 
tionaries at the capital. The warm spoken word of friendly inter- 
course with the country priest, the seer, the man of God, yielded to 
the cold impersonality of written law. 

So the development of the nation was given a new direction. In 
little more than a generation, Judah went into exile as a nation, 
whose teachers were still the prophets. After fifty years it returned 
to the ruined Jerusalem as a holy congregation, the repository of the 
sacred law. The Book of the Law, which King Josiah promulgated, 
marked the parting of the ways. 


Of the first seventeen years of Josiah’s reign, down to the year of 
the Reform in 621, the Hebrew historians recount nothing, for their 
attention is wholly centred on the great events that followed the dis- 
covery of the Book of the Law at Jerusalem. Yet great events too 
were happening in the world, of tragic consequence to the little king- 
dom. Within the half-century which comprised the lax rule of Ma- 
nasseh, the Assyrian Esarhaddon (680-668) held Judah in vassalage; 
and with greater success than attended his father, the baffled Sen- 
nacherib, he began the subjugation of Egypt, which his son Ashur- 
banipal completed. During the reign of this king (668-626), the As- 
syrian tide reached its flood, — and then receded. At length forced 
to relax its grip on the West, and stormed by enemies from every side, 
the grandiose empire crumbled swiftly. The very extent of its con- 
quests had weakened at the centre its power of resistance; its far- 
flung borders, which as independent states might have served for 
buffer territory, invited the attack of peoples hostile to Assyria, who 
pressed against them, and who finally struck at Nineveh itself. 

The dominance of the Semites, which had prevailed in the East for 
millennia, was shattered, as other races now emerged to contest their 

256 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


mastery. Nations of Asia Minor, the Lydians and the Phrygians, 
were implicated in the web that Assyria had woven across the world. 
From vast regions beyond the Caucasus mountains swarmed the 
Scythians, who ravaged outlying provinces of the empire, swept 
through Canaan, and menaced Egypt; though they did not penetrate 
the centre of Assyria, the impact of these hordes shook the whole 
structure of the loosely cemented empire. In the north, tribes of Ar- 
yan and Iranian stock had consolidated to form the kingdom of the 
Medes. In the south, some two centuries since, a wave of migration 
from the desert had brought the Chaldeans into Babylonia. Though 
the territory of this once mighty kingdom was ruled from Nineveh, 
yet under the impulse of the newcomers Babylon had long striven to 
make itself an independent capital, with varying success. At last the 
Chaldean Nabopolassar, viceroy of Babylon, combined with the 
Medes for a final assault upon the sovereign empire. Nineveh was 
taken, in 606, and utterly destroyed. With the fall of its capital, 
Assyria as a nation perished. Out of the ruins was built an empire of 
the Medes. And southward, Babylonia passed to the Chaldeans, 
who assumed also the Assyrian rights in Syria and Canaan. 

The dissolution of the eastern colossus was foreseen in the West. 
The kingdoms of the Nile had already thrown off the Assyrian yoke; 
and now united again under a single native ruler, Egypt pushed 
northward to share in the spoils of the crumbling empire, hoping also 
to reéstablish its ancient hegemony in the coastland. As its armies 
passed through Canaan, their advance was barred by Judah. It is 
hardly likely that Josiah acted on orders from his Assyrian overlord. 
Rather, noting that Assyrian control was loosened, he had no mind to 
exchange one master for another; and so he threw his forces, led by 
himself, across the forward path of Egypt. Daringly conceived, the 
move proved fatal, for in battle at Megiddo, in 608, Josiah was slain. 

257 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


At the moment, Egypt was paramount in Canaan. The people of 
Judah, intervening, as so often in their history, in the succession, 
raised a younger son of Josiah, by name Jehoahaz, to the throne. 
But the Pharaoh, who had reached Riblah on the Orontes, made him 
captive, and laid upon his kingdom a heavy tribute. The captive 
Jehoahaz was sent to Egypt, and there he died. Meanwhile the 
Pharaoh placed on the throne of Judah the deposed king’s elder 
brother Eliakim, making him change his name to Jehoiakim. Not 
the difference of name in itself but the fact of change was significant, 
for it betokened the Pharaoh’s authority as suzerain. Dutifully the 
new king paid the tribute, exacting the money from his people by 
taxation; it may be fancied that little remained to the kingdom, not 
wealthy at best, which had been despoiled by a long succession of 
rapacious victors. Judah continued subject to Egypt three years. 
In 605, at Carchemish on the Euphrates, the Egyptians were defeated 
by the Chaldeans, and driven back within their borders. The king 
of Egypt came not again any more out of his land; for the king of 
Babylon took, from the brook of Egypt unto the river Euphrates, all 
that pertained unto the king of Egypt (2 K. 247). 

In command of the Chaldeans at the battle of Carchemish was 
Nebuchadrezzar, son of King Nabopolassar, who survived his tri- 
umph over the ruined Assyria hardly two years. On news of his 
father’s death, the young prince hastened back to Babylon to become 
king in his stead. On the return of Nebuchadrezzar to the west the 
following year, Jehoikim, former vassal of the Pharaoh, offered sub- 
mission to the Chaldean. Three years later he rebelled; whereupon 
his overlord sent against him Chaldean troops, together with bands 
of subject peoples, the Arameans (Edomites?), Moabites, and Am- 
monites. Though the result of these expeditions is not related, nor 
the manner of the king’s death, it may be assumed that Judah was 

258 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


not subdued. For Jehoiakim’s son Jehoiachin had not reigned three 
months, when a Chaldean army laid siege to Jerusalem. In person 
Nebuchadrezzar appeared before the city; and Jehoiachin, with the 
queen-mother, his servants, his princes, and his officers, went out to 
him and surrendered, in 597. The victor stripped the Temple and 
the palace of their treasures; and he carried captive to Babylon the 
king himself, all the princes, all the great men, all the craftsmen and 
smiths; none remained save the poorest sort of the people of the land. 

The stroke was crushing but not final. With the tenacious spirit 
of its race, which adversity could not break but rather seemed to 
strengthen, the nation survived for ten years more. The conqueror 
set upon the Judahite throne Jehoiachin’s uncle Mattaniah, and 
changed his name to Zedekiah. But the vassal, still indomitable, re- 
belled; and in the ninth year of his reign, the Chaldeans, led by Nebu- 

chadrezzar, again invested Jerusalem. Resisting formidable siege- 
~ works constructed against it, the city held out for a year and a half. 
At last famine drove the defenders to a sortie. Through a breach in 
the walls the king attempted to escape with his forces. The Chal- 
deans, pursuing, overtook them in the plain about Jericho, captured 
the king, and scattered his army. Zedekiah was brought to Nebu- 
chadrezzar, who was now at Riblah. His sons were slain before his 
eyes, he himself was blinded, and sent in chains to Babylon. The 
Chaldeans burned Jerusalem, broke down the walls, and destroyed or 
carried off the metal furnishings of the Temple. Priests, officials, and 
others, numbering more than seventy, were put to death by Nebu- 
chadrezzar. Except for a remnant throughout the countryside, the 
people of Judah were driven into exile in Babylon (586). 

To administer what remained of the shattered kingdom, now a 
mere province of the Chaldean empire, Nebuchadrezzar appointed 
as governor Gedaliah, grandson of Shaphan the scribe, who had 

259 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


brought the Book of the Law to King Josiah. Stationed at the an- 
cient sanctuary of Mizpah, for Jerusalem was desolate, the governor 
gathered about him remnants of the people, refugees who had fled 
across the Jordan, and detachments of the Judahite army that had 
escaped capture. But his efforts to establish the state anew on the 
ruins of the old came to nothing. Within a few months, a conspiracy 
led by Ishmael of the seed royal, incited thereto by the Ammonites, 
compassed the assassination of Gedaliah, and the murder of Juda- 
hites and of some of the Chaldean garrison. In fear of the imperial 
vengeance, the little group which represented the wreck of the Juda- 
hite nation fled into Egypt. The “people of the land,” who still 
clung to their native soil, disappeared from history. 

Out of the ruin and dispersion of Judah, the sole hope of a future 
for the Hebrew people lay with the exiles in Babylon. Here the eter- 
nal qualities of their race, intensified by their varied experience as a 
nation, — their tenacity, their proud self-consciousness, their per- 
sistence under adversity and patience in suffering, their refined power 
of faith and profound spiritual insight, — still held them together as 
a little community, which amid the merge and welter of a vast em- 
pire yet felt itself exclusive, convinced of a mission and a peculiar 
destiny. When the Chaldean Babylon surrendered to a new master, 
Cyrus the Persian, the unregarded alien colony were permitted to 
return to the changed homeland of their fathers. But Israel itself 
was changed. The nation was no more. The people survived, and 
maintained their individuality as a theocracy. In different condi- 
tions therefore, their genius henceforward found expression in dif- 
ferent terms. The sun of Israel emerged from its eclipse to light the 
way of Judaism. 


During the few centuries of their national existence, Israel and 
260 


JUDAH AND ECLIPSE 


Judah were tiny states in a great world. Their passing left hardly a 
trace in the flow and ebb of empires. Yet their political insignificance, 
equalled by their failure in material accomplishment, but throws 
into higher relief their incalculable achievement for the spirit of man. 
Within cultural limitations and assailed by external disaster, un- 
folded the soul. As successive calamities closed in upon the nation, 
threatening its extinction, so much the more confidently its true 
leaders affirmed spiritual values. 

In so far as Israel was impelled to forms of art expression, its cul- 
ture found permanent embodiment only in its literature. Its influ- 
ence in shaping social conditions was exercised in the drafting of 
laws, fused in the passion for righteousness which kindled the proph- 
ets to fiery speech. What the prophets wrought, and how, has yet to 
be told. Illumined by their vision, tempered in their ardor, the gen- 
ius of Israel uttered itself supremely in religion. 


XI 
SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


Tue Hebrew monarchy, from its beginnings with Saul to the over- 
throw of the Judahite state, endured less than five hundred years. 
Of this troubled span, from morning through swift brilliant noon-day 
to late eclipse, Israel wrote its memories, in which reéchoed ancestral 
traditions from out the twilight centuries before the dawn. But the 
record now is brief and pieced of fragments. Songs and tales, his- 
torical narratives, codes of law, and sermons of the prophets went 
to make up the nation’s literature. All that has survived of this 


varied material is gathered in a book of larger compass, which later ° 


generations sealed with the impress of unique sanctity. In the long 
process of compilation, much was sacrificed to the purposes and 
methods of successive editors. The precious residue gained immor- 
tality, as the literature of Israel was wrought into the sacred scrip- 
tures of Judaism, the Old Testament of Christian faith. 

Israel’s story is told in the group of writings extending from Gen- 
esis to Kings.! These writings are woven together of four great nar- 
ratives, each the work of a separate school at a distinct epoch. The 
oldest narrative took shape in the Judahite kingdom, probably to- 
ward the middle of the ninth century; already complex in its earliest 
written form, it received additions with the lapse of time. This 
strand begins at Genesis 2 4b; in the terminology of Old Testament 
criticism, it is designated as J. About a century later, a second and 
independent narrative, beginning in fragmentary fashion in Genesis 
15 and appearing more fully in Genesis 20, was produced in the 

1 Except the Book of Ruth. 
262 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


northern or Ephraimite kingdom; it is designated as E. The third 
narrative was drafted by the school of writers who formulated the 
Book of the Law, found in the Temple in 621, which was incorporated 
in the scriptures as Deuteronomy; this strand is known as D. 
Finally a hundred years after the Exile, a group of Jewish priests in 
Babylon wrote a history of their people, carrying it back to the cre- 
ation of the world; their account is designated as P. This narrative, 
latest in age, comes first in position, for with it the Book of Genesis 
begins. Of the two opening chapters of Genesis, presenting different 
versions of the same theme, the first chapter is younger than the sec- 
ond by some four centuries. 

The four narratives suffered many mutations. The methods of 
the Hebrew historian were ingenuous and free. Writing anonymously 
himself, he had no conception of property in literature; he took what 
he wanted, without acknowledgment and without obligation. As he 
told his story, with his own material he combined prior texts, abridg- 
ing, supplementing, rearranging, even altering the sense, as suited 
his fancy or his motive. To the extent that he impressed his person- 
ality on the manner or the purpose of his work, he was an author; but 
in result, as in procedure, he was an editor or redactor. By such 
methods and processes the Hebrew scriptures came into being and 
attained their present form. 

The actual complexity of the text is difficult even to conceive, as 
it is impossible to follow in all its ramifications. The main course of 
growth, however, may be traced with some degree of certainty. 
Each basic document was itself composed of divers elements. The 
earliest, J, was compiled from older writings and from traditions; 
likewise the others. Subsequently each original basic narrative 
passed through the hands of redactors, who made changes and ad- 
ditions. Then two narratives were combined, forming a unit dif- 

263 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ferent from the mere sum of the parts, for the combination was modi- 
fied by further editing. The resultant document was compiled with a 
third narrative to constitute a still larger whole. Finally toward the 
end of the fifth century, the whole JED, in its turn was forced into 
P; and the completed work is designated, according to the order in 
which the documents appear in the text, as PJED. Sometimes two 
or more passages dealing with the same theme follow in succession, 
sometimes they are interwoven sentence by sentence; the editors 
employ every possible method of combination. The process of orig- 
inal composition, editing, and compilation reached its term only with 
the closing of the Canon of the “Law and the Prophets’ about 
200 B.c., having spanned more than seven hundred years. 

By reversing the course, analysis unravels the tangled skein. The 
four component narratives differed markedly in fibre, color, and 
style. Since they have preserved their individuality throughout their 
vagrant transmission, criticism has been able in general to recover 
each strand in its pristine substance, and by distinguishing what is 
primary from later additions and modifications, to assign a given 
passage to the period of its origin. Through ages Israel’s power of 
expression wrought for itself many and varied forms, — poem, oral 
tradition, written legend, authentic history, legal code, and prophetic 
discourse. When the complex is resolved into its elements, it be- 
comes possible to characterize the literary genius of Israel in its con- 
crete manifestations, to define for each example its significance to 
the age that produced it and its qualities as literature for all time. 


Israel began to record its present experiences and its memories of 
the past in the golden noon-day of the monarchy. The wandering 
Hebrew tribes who fought their way into Canaan had little need of 
writing; for heroic moments in their obscure fortunes lived again in 

264 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


tradition current on the lips of men. The union of the tribes under 
the monarchy, waking in them the consciousness of nationality, in- 
vested their lot with a new dignity and importance, and quickened 
them to a keener sense of an historic past now flowering in the glories 
of the present. By a happy comcidence, as the compelling, romantic 
figure of David and his illustrious deeds for the nation furnished in- 
centive to record events in enduring form, the ample peace of Solo- 
mon’s effulgent reign afforded leisure for contemplation and retro- 
spect. Occasion was matched by opportunity. 

The means of writing were at Israel’s disposal, though in what 
epoch the Hebrews began to use the art for their own purposes can- 
not be determined. Writing, in the form of hieroglyphs, had been 
practised in Egypt from extreme antiquity; and the nomad tribes in 
bondage there may have brought with them into Canaan the know]l- 
edge that such an art existed. Before the Hebrews entered the land, 
however, the Canaanites in the fifteenth century employed, as the 
Amarna tablets prove, the cuneiform script of Babylonia. Then 
there was devised, presumably between 1400 and 1000, but by what 
people is uncertain, the alphabetic method of writing, which marked 
an advance upon the syllabic characters of the cuneiform. This al- 
phabet became the property of the western Semitic world, used by 
the Canaanites, the Phoenicians, the Arameans, the Moabites; cen- 
turies afterwards it served as the prototype of the Greek and Roman 
script. As the Hebrews, after they entered Canaan, spoke a language 
cognate with the languages of neighboring Semitic peoples, so they 
adopted the common alphabet. A reference to the early use of writ- 
ing by the Israelites occurs in a narrative, drawn from an old source, 
of an incident in the period of the Judges, relating that a young man 
of Succoth wrote down the names of the princes and elders of the 
town, seventy-seven in number. From the mere ability to use writing 

. 265 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL | 


it is still a long step to literary composition. Not until the time of the 
monarchy was writing employed by the Israelites in any considerable 
measure. When the tribes then became a nation, they realized the 
value of state records and the significance of written history. 

King David, after the old manner of other kings, instituted at his 
court the office of scribe and of recorder. The function of the scribe 
was the despatch of royal correspondence, the practice of which was 
extensive among the nations; and upon the scribe or upon the re- 
corder devolved the preparation of the state annals. Modelled on 
the court documents of Egypt and Babylonia, these annals, begun by 
David and carried through the divided kingdoms, doubtless fur- 
nished the materials for the “Book of the Chronicles of Israel (or 
Judah)” frequently referred to in the Book of Kings. In themselves 
they were only a nucleus. The writing of history in the sense of sus- 
tained narrative was not attained until the reign of Solomon. 

Some one, probably attached to the court, closely informed as to 
events, perhaps himself a witness of them or even a participant, 
wrote down the story of David as a man and as king.! Other hands 
added preliminary material. Still others took up the threads and 
wove their pattern of the times of Saul. As years lengthened into 
decades and these into centuries, writers working ever in reverse di- 
rection recounted the acts of the Judges, the incidents of the Con- 
quest, the bondage in Egypt and the wilderness wanderings, the lives 
of the patriarchs, invention walking hand in hand with memory; un- 
til at last imagination, simple-hearted, dared to figure forth the very 
creation of the world. 

The impulse which thus initiated the writing of history was itself a 
culmination. Literary composition continued thence increasingly 


1 This narrative is now comprised within 2 Sam. 9-20 and 1 K. 1 and 2. The 
author may have been the priest Abiathar or the priest Ahimaaz. 


266 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


down the centuries. But turning backward, the skill of the earliest 
historians, contemporary with Solomon, implies a long discipline in 
the art of story-telling. The skill that was theirs was won for them 
by ages of vital inventive tradition. Israel had imagination, was 
quick to see and feel, loved life; aspiring toward divine things, it lost 
nothing of human values and excitements along the way. From the 
beginning, in every roving clan or village group, songs were sung and 
tales were told to celebrate heroic deeds or to rehearse some height- 
ened incident of which their little corner of the countryside was once 
the scene. So the material whereof writers in maturer years wove 
their intricate web was a heritage of memory descended to them from 
the lusty youth and strong young manhood of Israel’s tribal past. 
Within the conscious refinements of written narrative still beats the 
urgent pulse of poem and story close to the heart of the people and 
living on their lips. 

The four great basic narratives have each its own distinctive sub- 
stance and mode. In particular, however, with due allowance for 
their authors’ literary art, the two older works, J and EH, derive much 
of their special savor from the primal stuff of which they were com- 
posed. To taste that savor in its pristine freshness points the way to 
enjoyment of its ultimate fruition. By resolving the composite nar- 
ratives into their elements, it becomes possible to see the early liter- 
ature of Israel in the making, and to catch something of its immediate 
essential quality at the moment of its origin. 


Among every people, the oldest form of memorable speech is song 
or poem. So it was with the Hebrew tribes. The occasion of the ut- 
terance might be of the utmost diversity. A chieftain boasts his 
prowess (Gen. 4 23-24). Cherished by aclan from generation to gen- 
eration are verses signalizing its renown (Gen. 49 2-27; Deut. 33 6-25). 

267 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


A common task is lightened by a chant, which has besides a note of 
magical invocation (Num. 2117-18). In verse also are spoken divine 
oracles (Gen. 3 14-15, 16, 17-19; 16 11f.; 25 23; Ex. 17 14, 16; Num. 12 6-8; 
23 7-10, 18-24; 243-9, 15-24; 1 Sam. 15 22-23): blessing and curse, 
whether of God or of men, are pronounced in rhythmic measure 
(Gen. 9 25-27; 27 27-29, 39-40). The successful issue of a battle is cele- 
brated in a triumphal ode (Ex. 15 1; Ju. 5 2-31). Touching the lighter 
side, proverbial sayings pass current like coins, stamped with a recog- 
nizable impress (Num. 21 27; 1 Sam. 2413). To riddles such as Sam- 
son posed (Ju. 14 14), their metrical form gives added zest. Jotham’s 
mocking parable (Ju. 9 8-15) is but a single example of probably 
many trenchant poetic fables, which in pointing a moral, likewise 
pleased the fancy of the crowd. Grief finds voice no less than joy, and 
utters itself in the lament. The poetry of Israel reaches the heights 
in David’s supreme elegy (2 Sam. 1 19-27). Herewith is by no means 
exhausted the variety of motive and theme. 

Inspired by occasion, a poem leaps to utterance in response to im- 
mediate popular acclaim. The wellspring of early Hebrew verse may 
be imagined somewhat after this fashion. The clansmen are gathered 
before their tents, or the villagers in the broad place of the gate. 
Excitement sways the assembly. Under the stress, some one — a 
woman it may be, a Miriam or a Deborah, for women were poets no 
less than men, yielding nothing to them of inspiration and leadership 
— bounds forward to voice the emotion of the instant. It is an out- 
burst of feeling, whose intensity compels a rhythm of speech and 
movement, perhaps but a single measured verse or two. The hearers, 
sharing the exaltation, participate in the action with accordant 
shout, with striking of hands or stamping of feet, and with imitative 
gesture, that may expand into a dance. So the poet can be conceived 
as speaking always in the presence of an audience; his verses are not 

268 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING ~ 


written for distant and unknown readers, but are pronounced in the 
hearing of the clan. With reason, therefore, many Hebrew poems 
take the form of address. Thus the braggart chieftain, himself typi- 


cal of a clan boasting of its repute: 


Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; 
Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech. 


Thus the workers delving in the desert sand: 
Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it. 

In fragments of tribal songs: 
Rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out; 
And, Issachar, in thy tents. 

In Deborah’s triumphal ode: 


Hear, O ye kings; give ear, O ye princes; . 
I, even I, will sing unto Yahweh. 


So Miriam celled, 
Sing ye to Yahweh, for he hath triumphed gloriously; - 


And the women answered, 


The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 


Often the “poet” is not an individual, but rather the group itself; 
and the verses are chanted by the gathering as a chorus, shouting 
in unison or in antiphonal response. “It came to pass, when David 
returned from the slaughter of the Philistines, that the women came 
out of all the cities of Israel, singing and dancing, tc meet king Saul, 
with timbrels, with joy, and withinstruments of music. And the 
women sang one to another in their play, and said, (one group) 
Saul hath slain his thousands, 
(and the answering chorus came) 
And David his ten thousands.” 
Closely suiting the poet’s attitude and motive, the form of Hebrew 


verse is eminently fitted to be the medium of ejaculation. Its metri- 
269 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


cal character is determined by stress, with usually two or four, less 
often with three, accents to a line; the number of unaccented sylla- 
bles between the beats remains free. A special order of verse-form, 
the gina or lament, observes a more rigid limitation; it has three 
stresses in the first line and two in the second: 
Fallen no more to rise, 
Virgin of Israel; 
Hurled upon her land, 
None to raise her! 
The structure of the poem is based on a balancing, usually in pairs, of 
lines, and integral with them, of ideas. The single line is virtually 
complete in itself, the end of it coinciding with a pause in the sense; 
the second line is a counterpart of the first, restating the same idea 
with different words, or setting forth its contrast. The unit in He- 
brew verse, therefore, is the couplet, which may overflow into three 
lines; longer poems consist in a building up of distinct units into a 
series. 
Yahweh, when thou wentest forth out of Seir, 
When thou marchedst out of the field of Edom, 
The earth trembled, 
The heavens also dropped, 
Yea, the clouds dropped water. 
The mountains quaked at the presence of Yahweh, 
Even yon Sinai at the presence of Yahweh, the God of Israel. 
In the Hebrew, the rhetorical effect is heightened by assonance, or 
similarity of sound, and by paronomasia, or play upon the same 
sound with a difference of meaning, comparable to the pun, a play, 
however, which may be used with utmost seriousness to intensify the 
emotional appeal. A few instances of rhyme may be considered as 
accidental; for although the language, with its pronominal suffixes 
and the endings of verbs, easily lends itself to rhyme, the poets did 
not with deliberate intention avail themselves of the device. These 
270 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


effects are necessarily lost in translation; but even lacking them, in 
translation the power and intensity of the verse prevail. 

The qualities of this poetry as literature are conditioned in part by 
the resources of Hebrew speech. The vocabulary is concrete and 
vivid, not abstract and pale; a word is image rather than idea. As 
with a primitive language generally, so in Hebrew, the inherent 
metaphor is not yet faded with the lapse of time nor attenuated by 
ages of reflection. Adjectives are not many. The burden of mean- 
ing, with whatever modifications attach to it, is carried chiefly by 
nouns, which hold in themselves the objective image. The Hebrew 
forged no compound words; speech is wrought of single but figura- 
tive elements. Likewise the sentence structure, as compared with 
Greek or Latin, seems rudimentary. Syntactical relations are ex- 
pressed with great simplicity. Nouns have but two case-forms, the 
“absolute” and the “construct.” Verbs have only two tenses, the 
so-called “‘perfect’’ and “imperfect,’’ which denote not the order of 
time but the kind of action, finished or unfinished, whether in the 
past, the present, or the future. These tenses, however, are capable 
of very delicate implications. Because particles and connectives are 
limited in number, so with a kind of impressive uniformity, as though 
keeping step rank upon rank, sentence follows sentence, all of the 
same mould and value: the normal order of words is verb, subject, 
and object, for the act itself, with its consequences, is regarded as 
more important than the agent; fashioned after this pattern, then, 
and owing to the want of different connectives, clauses are generally 
coordinate. Therefore sentences cannot be developed by complex 
modulations into long sustained or highly varied periods. The power 
of Hebrew style resides not in the subtleties of intricate rhythms nor 
fanciful embellishment, but in forthright emphasis and the primal 
imagery of words. 

271 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


As the medium of literature, this language was well adapted to the 
Israelites’ innate temperament. Their reaction to the world about 
them was immediate, acute, and practical. In the contacts of life, 
they were more swayed by vehemence of feeling than controlled 
by reflective thought. They had more of passion, as uttered in the 
bitter taunts and fierce exultation of Deborah’s Song, than of recol- 
lected sentiment, of which David’s Lament is almost the sole though 
fervidly moving example. Out of this instant, vivid reaction to ex- 
citements sprang the heightened speech which catches the beat of 
verse. So a poem was the issue, at the very moment itself, of direct 
experience rather than the product of free-ranging, timeless inven- 
tion. Israelite poetry does not essay to create a world desired, a 
world of loveliness, of iridescent color, and transfiguring phantasies; 
rather it mirrors the world that is, but aglow with passion. Its effect 
is to be sought not in new reaches of emotion summoned from afar, 
but in its own kindling energy, its power with quickened pulses to 
raise habitual emotions to a new intensity. 

So much of early Israelite poetry as has survived is but a kind of 
torso, which an active willing imagination must restore to its original 
completeness. Poems and bits of verse embedded in the present He- 
brew narratives are not more than fifty. Doubtless a far larger num- 
ber were current in their own age, either of local source and interest 
or carried by ballad-singers throughout the clans and the country- 
side. In the favoring conditions of union and peace under the mon- 
archy, the nation was enabled to place another and greater value 
upon its literature. Impelled thereto as lovers of poetry or as anti- 
quarians whose scholarship was a form of patriotism, learned men, 
possibly among them King Solomon himself, made collections of the 
songs and poems of their people. Two such anthologies are cited by 
name, with excerpts from each: they are the Book of the Wars of 

272 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


Yahweh, Num. 21 14, and the Book of the Upright (or Valiant), 
Jos. 10 13, 2 Sam. 1 18. It is significant of the course of Israel’s lit- 
erary development that the oldest Hebrew books of which there is 
record were books of poems. From the former of these comes one 
fragment, obscure in meaning; from the latter are quoted a quatrain 
and a long poem of incomparable pathos and beauty. Precious as is 
the Lament over Saul and Jonathan, the references in the narratives 
to these two Books serve rather to imply how much has vanished ir- 
revocably. The certain gain seems less than the probable loss. In the 
mere names of these lost treasuries, only fugitive echoes of the spirit 
of poetry once vitally creative now linger as faint traces of its passing. 

From but a few examples of Israelite poetry, therefore, must be in- 
ferred its characteristic mode and special savor. Responding to the 
impulsive, abrupt temper of the people, most of the poems are strik- 
ingly brief. Until later centuries, by far the longest was the Song of 
Deborah. Some which seem to equal this were composed of short 
poems originally separate, as the Blessing of Jacob and the Blessing 
of Moses; or they were expanded in after ages, as the Song of 
Moses upon the deliverance from Egypt (Ex. 15). The Hebrews 
fashioned no epic, like the Babylonian story of Gilgamesh. The epic 
derives its inspiration and material from mythology, which presup- 
poses a plurality of gods. Israel had no mythology of its own, not 
because it lacked the narrative imagination but because very early 
it conceived the deity as but one god. Its personifications of the ob- 
jects and forces of nature were not lifted to the level of divinities. 
Mythology, besides, is the offspring of speculation, the eager ques- 
tioning after the essence and causes of things. Israel was single- 
minded; its zeal for the one God consumed whatever it might have of 
intellectual curiosity. 

The themes of Israelite poetry are not of epic magnitude; they are 

273 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


close to the people in its customary ways, with such excitements as 
the daily round may offer. They touch few of the great, deep ele- 
ments of universal human experience common to all races and every 
age; rather, they are of tribal or local import, of interest only to the — 
Israelites themselves at the time. Typically the poem is brief, for 
the theme is quickly exhausted. It deals with a single moment real- 
ized as immediately present before the vision of singer and hearer; or 
the emotion which it utters, though all-possessing, is simple, primal, 
without admixture or subtle shades. In default of a sustained motive 
and owing to the limited scope of Hebrew sentences, the poem lacks 
interior construction; progress is succession rather than develop- 
ment. Though discursive, however, the style is not diffuse; on the 
contrary, it is so compact, so swiftly allusive, as often to be difficult 
of understanding. With this extreme compression and strongly ac- 
cented, as if spoken in a loud voice, it attains the maximum of inten- 
sity. The poem is built up of complement and contrast, without in- 
termediate gradations. Images drawn from direct observation are 
revealed by a lightning flash; sharp of edge, with inflexible finality, 
they stand shadowless, — and disappear. . 
In the days of Shamgar the son of Anath, 
In the days of Jael, caravans ceased, 


And travellers walked through byways. 
Villages (?) ceased in Israel, they ceased. 


The sweep is wide; stroke upon stroke, the single phrase summons 
multitudes: 


Tell of it, ye that ride on white asses, 

Ye that sit on rich carpets, 

Ye that walk by the way. 

Far from the noise of archers, 

In the places of drawing water, 

There shall they rehearse the righteous acts of Yahweh. 


. 274 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


The narrative speeds headlong: 


They chose new gods; 

Then was war in the gates: 

Was there a shield or spear seen 
Among forty thousand in Israel? 


In the rapid succession of images, often the transitions are sudden 
and violent, but with a tremendous effect of presentness and reality. 


The kings came and fought; 

Then fought the kings of Canaan, ” 

In Taanach by the waters of Megiddo: 

They took no gain of money. 

From heaven fought the stars, 

From their courses they fought against Sisera. 
The river Kishon swept them away, 

That ancient river, the river Kishon. 

O my soul, march on with strength! 

Then did the horsehoofs stamp, 

By reason of the prancings, the prancings of their strong ones. 


Of a different mood but similar manner is David’s Elegy. The note 
of triumph, vindictiveness, and scorn of the battle ode here gives 
place to grief. Deborah incarnates the fierce spirit of the tribes. 
David, lamenting the great misfortune that has befallen the nation, 
voices also his own intimate personal loss. Here are the same brief, 
full-freighted ejaculations, the same tumultuous welling-up of image 
after image, the same pregnant allusiveness, the same finality, equally 
charged with single overwhelming emotion. The stunning force of 
the rugged triumph song yields here to pathos and beauty. 


Thy glory, O Israel, is slain upon thy high places! 

How are the mighty fallen! 

Ye mountains of Gilboa, 

Let there be no dew nor rain upon you, neither fields of offerings: 
For there the shield of the mighty was defiled, 

The shield of Saul, as of one not anointed. 


275 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL ~ 


From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, 
The bow of Jonathan turned not back, 

And the sword of Saul returned not empty. 

Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant in their lives, 
And in their death they were not divided; 

They were swifter than eagles, 

They were stronger than lions. 

Ye daughters of Israel, weep over Saul, 

Who clothed you in scarlet with delights; 

Who put ornaments of gold upon your apparel. 


I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: 
Very pleasant hast thou been unto me: 

Thy love to me was wonderful, 

Passing the love of women. 

How are the mighty fallen, 

And the weapons of war perished! 


In Deborah’s battle Song and David’s Lament the poetic genius of 
early Israel attains its supreme expression. But the qualities they 
exemplify are in varying measure typical of all Hebrew poems. The 
Israelites were a music-loving folk; and their verse had its suitable 
rhythms and its own kind of sonorities. For its hearers, this poetry 
with its energetic beat and impetuous movement must have been 
exciting in the highest degree. To appreciate it fully, to receive the 
import of its themes and its emotional power, it is necessary to regard 
it from the Israelites’ own point of view, to identify oneself imagi- 
natively with them, and thus, as for oneself, to realize it as their life 
enhanced and intensified. For modern readers of it in translation, it 
offers the stimulus of vivid images bodying forth an elder world of a 
singularly gifted people, images often beautiful and always alight 
with the poet’s passion. 

Upon the overthrow of the state there followed in Hebrew poetry a 
change of motive and a development of the form. The poems of Is- 


rael sprang from daily life, from war, adventure, work and play, with 
276 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


no consciousness of a special religious interest. The Song of Deborah 
celebrated the triumphant prowess of the tribal god, but in a spirit of 
thanksgiving common to all worshippers. David’s Lament was merely 
human, with no appeal to Yahweh. After the nation perished, the 
poetry of Judaism, under the constraint of earthly hopes defeated, 
became explicitly religious, the utterance of profoundly meditated 
devotion. Herewith the form attained a larger compass and a greater 
variety of movement. The simple couplet flowered into complex par- 
agraphs long sustained. Thus the old Song, ascribed in a variant 
version to Moses, consisted originally of but two lines: 


I will sing unto Yahweh, for he hath triumphed gloriously: 
The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 


A later poet, taking the simple motive, expanded it with symphonic 
breadth. What before was mere succession here becomes anticipative 
design. The total structure is foreseen; the theme unfolds, the repeat 
within the pattern occurs with variations of phrase, and the theme 
returns upon itself with adroit inversion. 


Yahweh is a man of war: 

Yahweh is his name. 

Pharaoh’s chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea; 

And his chosen captains are sunk in the Red Sea. 

The deeps cover them: 

They went down into the depths like a stone. 

Thy right hand, O Yahweh, is glorious in power, 

Thy right hand, O Yahweh, dasheth in pieces the enemy. 

And in the greatness of thine excellency thou overthrowest them 
that rise up against thee: 

Thou sendest forth thy wrath, it consumeth them as stubble. 

And with the blast of thy nostrils the waters were piled up, . 

The floods stood upright as an heap; 

The deeps were congealed in the heart of the sea. 

The enemy said, 

I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil: 

My desire shall be satisfied upon them; 


277 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them. 
Thou didst blow with thy wind, the sea covered them: 
They sank as lead in the mighty waters. 

Who is like unto thee, O Yahweh, among the gods? 
Who is like thee, glorious in holiness, 

Fearful in praises, doing wonders? 


Yahweh shall reign for ever and ever. 
Of such majesty and eloquence the poetic achievement of early 
Israel was the promise. 


A poem rose on the instant in response to occasion and limited as 
to form. More ample and sustained was the flow of story in free, 
spontaneous invention, and current in everyday speech. Its begin- 
nings lay far back in the desert. Thence the Hebrew tribes brought 
their traditions with them into the richly storied land of Canaan, 
which proved fertile also of new growth. Remembered and retold, 
the cherished tales passed from generation to generation, receiving 
increase as they went; until at length the spoken word was fixed in 
writing, and oral tradition became legend to be read. Of this age- 
long process the great narratives of the Hebrew scriptures are the 
culmination. 

Young imagination, ever awake, demands doing, and it fashions 
stories for the easy satisfaction of its simple needs. Often the little 
narratives are merely amusing, whether crackling with rude humor, 
tense with exciting crises, or more gently touched with romance. 
They may rehearse the acts of ancestral heroes or shadow forth the 
mysterious ways of gods who revealed themselves to men. Some- 
times they have a deeper import, for in terms of incident and image 
they offer childlike answers to childlike questionings, Whence, How, 
Why? Here clothes itself in story whatever may stir of primitive 


urge to the search that maturer peoples come to know as philosophy 
278 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


and science. By anticipation, likewise, narrative tradition serves in 
the stead of history. The popular tales may also be the vesture and 
concrete symbol of religious truth and teaching. In them the clan 
finds both entertainment and its sole means of information; they are 
the sum of knowledge which the people have thus far won. The 
themes, therefore, may be of the most varied substance, but their es- 
sence is always action. Each individual tribe or group devises its 
own stories. But all have many themes in common; and stories, 
once in being, travel from clan to clan, from place to place. 

Of such vagrant and diverse material the historians of Israel in 
later ages wove their scriptures. In this large web, the early tales ap- 
pear only as brief passages of color and movement; those alone have 
been caught up that could be fitted into the main design. Doubtless 
innumerable others lapsed into silence and oblivion. Skilful writers 
of after centuries, with accomplished literary art, transformed them 
in adapting them to their own high purposes. Yet in their present 
setting, something of their pristine freshness and charm abides. 

Wherever men gathered was the scene of their telling, — about the 
camp-fires, in the places of drawing water, in the town gate, at social 
feasts, on the thronging pilgrimages to the great shrines. In the hear- 
ing of ardent listeners, the tales were told with extreme brevity and 
sharpness of contour. A few minutes sufficed; but what the story 
lacked in duration was redeemed by vivid action. With acute feeling 
for narrative values, the short span comprised a real plot-interest; as 
one or another outcome was possible, uncertain from the beginning, 
attention was held in suspense till the last word fell. Recited before 
their hearers with appropriate gesture and inflection, the stories 
took on a natural dramatic emphasis. Two persons, or at most 
three, were enough to carry the action. With typical breadth of por- 
trayal, they showed who and what they were by-what they did. Each 

‘ 279 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL” 


character was distinguished by a single dominant trait, heightened in 
each by contrast to the other. 


Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a 
quiet man, dwelling in tents....And Jacob boiled pottage: and 
Esau came in from the field, and he was faint: and Esau said to 
Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am 
faint. .. . And Jacob said, Sell me first thy birthright. And Esau said, 
Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall the birthright 
do to me? And Jacob said, Swear to me first; and he sware unto 
him: and he sold his birthright unto Jacob. And Jacob gave Esau 
bread and pottage of lentils; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, 
and went his way: so Esau despised his birthright. 


This plain duality, working by contrast, is based in the same turn 
of mind that found expression in the balance of verse. In method, 
too, the tales were similar to the early poems, — swift movement, 
stroke upon stroke. Attention was centred on incident in quick 
succession. 


And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until 
the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not 
against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of 
Jacob’s thigh was strained, as he wrestled with him. And he said, 
Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, 
except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? 
And he said, Jacob. ... And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I 
pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost 
ask after my name? And he blessed him there. 


And it came to pass on the way at the lodging-place, that Yahweh 
met him [Moses], and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a 
flint, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet; and 
she said, Surely a bridegroom of blood art thou to me. So he let him 
alone. 


The stories end, as they begin, abruptly. Tales like these spring from 
ia 280 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


the imagination of a passionately endowed people burning at its high- 
est intensity. They are charged with a sense of portent, something 
fateful, inevitable. Even in stories in lighter vein, relating the tricks 
whereby a wily young shepherd outwits his older kinsman, or the sub- 
terfuge by which the pious ancestor in respect of his wife deceives the 
mighty Pharaoh to his own material advantage, even here the deity 
is felt to be present and influencing the action. Vital, pungent, con- 
centrated, these tales, brief though they are, — and their compression 
constitutes a virtue, — preserve in its purest quality the flavor of soil 
and air of which they were grown. 

In the sustained narratives of the Hebrew scriptures, the early 
stories are used as episodes in the larger pattern. They are linked to- 
gether by adroit transitions with a continuity that reveals a mas- 
terly control of material and method. Before they reached their 
consummate form, however, they had travelled long and far. Not all 
were of Hebrew origin. There are tales that seem to be universal, 
passing from one people to another as though carried on the wind. 
Many of the stories taken over by Israel were Canaanite, especially 
those localized at the ancient shrines, like the story of Jacob at 
Beth-el; some were Babylonian, like the narratives of Creation, the 
Flood, the Tower of Babel; a few derive from Egypt, as in the Jo- 
seph legends. Gradually the tales were cast in the Hebrew mould, un- 
til at last, when wrought into the great composite narratives, they 
were stamped with the impress of Israel’s own genius. Some of the 
oldest, drawn from foreign sources, resisted the process, and their 
primal substance is not quite transformed, still tinged with mytholog- 
ical color, and reflecting the mind of the people that fashioned them 
originally. 

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of 
the ground, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of 

281 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took 
them wives of all that they chose. And Yahweh said, My spirit shall 
not strive with man for ever, for that he also is flesh: yet shall his 
days be an hundred and twenty years. The Nephilim [giants] were 
in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God 
came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: 
the same were the mighty men which were of old, the men of renown. 


Here the material is not wholly fused; the stamp of Yahweh imposed 
upon it does not quite obscure the basic metal. In the large, how- 
ever, the contrast between the deeply religious import of the Hebrew 
narratives and the crass mythology of their foreign prototypes and 
parallels is a measure of Israel’s spiritualizing power. 

From the sweep of spontaneous, unceasing invention, some tales, 
more apt or more beloved, persisted through the centuries, carried 
only in remembrance. But this sufficed, for the memory of an un- 
lettered folk is amazingly tenacious of cherished lore. Transmitted 
from father to son since time began, they were invested with the 
sanctity that attaches to long tradition. A wider currency was gained 
for them on the lips of wandering story-tellers, moving from village 
to village and joyously welcomed at the great popular feasts. As 
among the Arabs to-day, so in early Israel were professional reciters 
of poems and tales, who practised their craft with the conscience that 
suited the dignity of an ancient guild. Such were “they who speak in 
proverbs,” to whose fidelity was attributed the poem concerning 
Heshbon (Num. 21 27), a single instance out of a large number possi- 
ble. Told by these skilled narrators, subject to the approval or cor- 
rection of expert listeners, the stories, thus polished by attrition, ac- 
quired a rounded finality of form, ready at hand for the cunning use 
of the masters in a more learned age. 

Stories that had certain elements in common were readily com- 

282 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING © 


bined. In its present Hebrew shape, the legend of Babel, brief as it 
is, implicates three motives: Why do men speak different languages? 
Whence came the great mound in Babylon? How did the city get its 
name? Several clans might have variant versions of the same event, 
each clan ascribing the deed to its own ancestor or hero; so in the 
transition, while the essence of the action remained the same, the 
personages received a change of name. Some tales gathered about a 
towering figure; thus the multifarious Jacob, ancestor and consum- 
mate type, drew many to himself. Others drifted to certain places, 
Hebron and Beer-sheba in the south, Shechem and Beth-el in the 
north, prominent in the life of the people. There were kinds of stories 
that would be prized by one class or another in the community, as 
the priests or the prophets. By the force of mutual attraction, then, 
individual legends tended to come together into cycles. A final centre 
about which the several cycles in their turn might group themselves 
was achieved in the union of the tribes under the monarchy. Now 
selection would operate most completely, to the exclusion and ulti- 
mate loss of stories less relevant to Israel. By this time it is proba- 
ble that many of the traditions, either singly or in cycles, were com- 
mitted to writing by the class or locality immediately concerned 
with their preservation. 

The Hebrew state became two kingdoms. The northern kingdom, 
shaken by constant turmoil at home and by foreign wars, provided 
nothing of the security or leisure favorable to the quiet labors of lit- 
erature. In the south, Judah was more at ease. The unbroken suc- 
cession of David’s line, the reflected splendors of noontide days still 
glowing upon the throne, the remoteness of its territory from exter- 
nal foes, disposed the scholars of the little nation to patriotic retro- 
spect. With freedom and collectedness of mind thus assured to them, 
they were prompted to survey their fugitive past even to its origins; 

283 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


recovering its vagrant memorials, they essayed to preserve them en- 
duringly. In Judah, therefore, was wrought the first great narrative 
relating the history of the people, the tribal and ancestral fortunes, 
and ranging adventurously back to the creation of the world. 

Unravelled from the web of the Hebrew scriptures, this brightly 
colored strand is known conveniently as J. The symbol is also used 
to signify the author or authors who first produced the continuous 
narrative in its written form. Whether the author was an individual 
or a group, the narrative bears the impress of a distinctive person- 
ality. Its quality is unique; its story-telling art is supreme. 

The great narrative of J extends from the second chapter of Gen- 
esis probably to the first two chapters of Kings. The Judahite his- 
tory opens upon the earth barren of all vegetation. Out of the dust 
of the ground Yahweh fashions man; Yahweh plants a garden east- 
ward in Eden and causes trees to grow; he forms of the dust every 
beast and bird; and at the last he makes woman. Then come the 
stories of the temptation and the fall, the drunkenness of Noah (the 
Flood is a later strand), the building of Babel. A list of the ancestors 
of mankind is followed by legends of the patriarchs, dealing with 
their individual adventures and their contacts with neighboring and 
related peoples. The narrative flows out into the broad reaches of 
Joseph’s fortunes in Egypt; with the burial of his father Jacob, the 
closing chapter of Genesis marks only a momentary pause. 

The Book of Exodus begins with the death of Joseph. Thereupon 
follow the stories of the oppression of the Israelites, who have greatly 
increased in numbers, Moses’ experiences in the land of Midian and 
his return to Egypt, the plagues that Yahweh visits upon the op- 
pressors, culminating in the death of the firstborn, which occasions 
the institution of the Passover; then the deliverance at the Red Sea, 
the journey through the wilderness guided by fire and cloud, leading 

284 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


up to the decisive event at Mount Sinai, the giving of the Law. The 
Book of Numbers spans the wanderings of the Israelites before they 
entered Canaan. Here J relates the departure from the sacred moun- 
tain, with the Ark of Yahweh in the van, the provision of manna and 
quails, the sending of the spies into the southland, the revolt and 
punishment of Dathan and Abiram, the march to the regions east of 
Jordan, the conquest of Moab, and finally one strand of the story of 
Balaam, the Ammonite seer. The account of Yahweh’s promise to 
Moses, about to die within sight of the promised land, which prop- 
erly belongs here, has been carried over by a redactor to the end of 
Deuteronomy. 

The Judahite narrative is continued in Joshua, but only in frag- 
ments. Here, moreover, it is so intertwined with E that it can hardly 
be separated. To J may be attributed a part of the story of Rahab, 
perhaps some details of the crossing of the Jordan and the capture of 
Ai, and the stratagem of the Gibeonites. The strand reappears in the 
first chapter of Judges, which is in fact parallel with Joshua, not its 
sequel; and toward the end of Judges, the narrative gathers to itself 
the tales about Micah and his sanctuary, the migration of the tribe 
of Dan, the outrage by the men of Gibeah and the consequent pun- 
ishment of the Benjaminites. Between the first chapter of Judges and 
this group of tales, the stories of the several deliverers of Israel, — 
Ehud, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson, together with the story of 
Abimelech, — which were probably taken up into the narrative of 
J, differ in nature from the material used in the preceding portions of 
the great work. They were heroic legends about real persons, except 
Samson, of the not too distant past. They were drawn originally 
from oral tradition: but when written down, they were nearer in time 
to the events they recount; and they have therefore a genuinely his- 
torical character. The same considerations hold true, to an even 

285 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


greater extent, in the Book of Samuel. The kingship of Saul pre- 
ceded the beginnings of historical record in Israel by hardly more than 
a generation; and the life of David was written by a contemporary. 
With the accession of Solomon to the throne, the Judahite narrative 
ends. 

It was an inspiring theme which furnished incentive to so magnifi- 
cent a task, — to trace the history of the Hebrew nation, beginning 
with the very creation of man and reaching a climax in the glories of 
the Davidic monarchy. In Judah, about a century after Solomon’s 
reign, the narrative was brought to completion in its first great com- 
prehensive form. Place and time favored the undertaking. Judah, 
rather than troubled Ephraim, was heir to David’s kingdom. The 
usurper Athaliah had perished by the sword of avenging priests; and 
the young prince Joash, drawn from the shelter of the Temple pre- 
cincts, was placed securely on his rightful throne. After agonizing 
years of war with the brother kingdom of the north, Judah was now 
at peace. In such circumstances, for enlightened patriots it was a 
labor of love to recall the fortunes and triumphs of their people, 
vouchsafed to them by Israel’s God. These writers may well have 
belonged to the priestly circles. As the learned class, priests would 
have the knowledge requisite for the enterprise. The narrative 
shows the scholar’s interest in origins, in the meaning of names, the 
history of places: it is concerned with the legends of holy sites and 
with traditions relating to the cultus, the customs and ceremonies of 
the national worship; and throughout it is profoundly animated by 
religious purpose. 


Within the Judahite history are included very many of the super- 
lative examples of Hebrew narrative. These best-loved stories are so 
familiar, that it is difficult to see them freshly in relation to their 

286 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


original background and so to realize how greatly Israel wrought in 
its own time and way. They are unsurpassed in any age: in their own 
age they have no equal. Simple, concise, fluent, vivid, they are 
masterpieces of story-telling art. Their simplicity is not a lack of 
depth or import, but results from a long refinement. Shaped by 
eager popular imagination, they were compacted and intensified by 
centuries of transmission, until at last the master touched them 
with their eternally perfect form. The primal qualities of the early 
tales have passed into the written narratives, their spirited move- 
ment, dramatic force, succinct emphasis. The writers who collected 
the old traditions also knew how to develop these qualities to the 
fullest potency. . 

Fluent of action, the stories are distinguished by their skill in 
characterization. Although in primitive society the individual was 
merged in the group, the figures of Israelite literature are keenly in- 
dividualized. In a measure they were representative of tribes or 
classes or single human traits, but they are not merely typical. Drawn 
with a few strokes, they are distinct, specific, alive by their own 
right. The great-souled Abraham, the querulous Sarah, the subtile, 
many-sided Jacob, worthy son of the resourceful, shrewd Rebekah, 
the talented Joseph favored by fortune, the imperious Pharaoh, the 
divinely gifted Moses, yet humanly distrustful of his own powers, and 
so through a thronging company of full-passioned men and women, 
even the serpent in the garden, all are convincingly actual. Supple- 
menting the recital, the adroit use of brief but significant dialogue 
imparts dramatic presentness to action and character. 

The stories in Genesis have the freshness and glamour of an elder 
world. Originally the inventive expression of a rude people, who 
had to win their way by fighting, whose God was a God of battles, 
the tales of Israel’s earliest days, by some strange kind of metamor- 

287 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


phosis, are suffused with idyllic charm. Not warlike exploits are 
their theme, but the pursuits of peace. Their heroes are shepherds 
and husbandmen. They tell of common, homely matters, of day- 
break, of noontide heat, the cool of the evening, and childhood ter- 
rors of the night, of family and flocks, of barter, of gatherings at the 
well. The starveling fare of desert camp and of the long, errant 
search for water and pasturage, the dull toil upon the land, are trans- 
muted into the glow of familiar communings with a genial God and 
the cheer of human intercourse in a friendly world. So life is ideal- 
ized, as seen through the bright haze of dawn. 

The material of Exodus and Numbers is less intimate, less plastic. 
The scene changes; the actors are subordinate to happenings beyond 
individual control. Here the adventures of simple persons give place 
to events, in which the whole people play a part. The outlines were 
already fixed by a larger sweep of circumstance; the content was less 
capable of imaginative projection, of warm embodiment in living 
forms. In Joshua and the second half of Judges, the narrative, though 
telling of stratagems and spoils, returns to its genre pictures drawn 
from the little life of every day. Rahab the harlot, the wild esca- 
pades of Samson, the luck of Micah with his private shrine, the Levite 
from the remote hill-country of Ephraim and the horrible fate of his 
concubine, — these tales mirror the world that Israel knew. In the 
first half of Judges and in Samuel, the substance differs, as the docu- 
ment comes closer to historical record; but style and manner pre- 
serve their characteristic power of fluent recital and vivid portrai- 
ture, their luminous clarity of action and image. 

So masterly are these Judahite stories that their quality as narra- 
tive is not impaired by the didactic purpose to which they were 
moulded, a purpose both historical and religious. Prompted by their 
sense of national greatness, the writers sought to prove Israel’s pre- 

288 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


destined right to the possession of Canaan. To this end they mar- 
shalled the legends that had gathered of old time about heroic per- 
sonages and hallowed places; but these incidents, the Hebrew his- 
torians imputed to their own ancestors. From their methods it re- 
sulted that many of the ancient traditions, in their present form, are 
capable of various interpretations. It is not easy to discern their 
original meaning or to disengage from its investing imagery the sub- 
stantial element of fact. Yet whatever their primary significance or 
the import placed upon them by the historians, they retain their 
narrative fascination. The love of story for its own sake will not be 
denied; dramatic reality triumphs over the special intention it was 
designed to serve. 

The historical purpose, however, is less dominant than the per- 
vading conviction of God’s instant presence that the tales are con- 
trived to exemplify. The God whom the Judahite writers knew was 
the Yahweh of the old worship, though spiritualized by delicate lit- 
erary tact and a finer conscience. Not too remote from the world 
that he has made, he moves in familiar converse with men. Trust- 
ingly yet with grave restraint, he is thus figured as a person; but he 
does not lack divine majesty, as witness his revelations of himself in 
lightnings and earthquake. In the handling of their varied matter, 
the narrators, working in an age before the prophets announced the 
moral nature of God in all its rigor and exaltation, are guided by an 
extraordinarily sensitive perception of right conduct. Primitive man 
stands in personal relation with his deity for help or harm; the mo- 
tive of his religion is hope of favor or dread of evil to his physical 
welfare. This material relationship the Judahite writers transmuted 
into moral values. To a degree which peoples of greater cultural gifts 
never attained, Israel apprehended the grandeur and the gracious- 
ness of God, whose justice was throned on love. No nation contem- 

289 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


porary with Israel was able to clothe its concept of the divine with 
such simple dignity and compelling reality. 


About a century after the composition of the great Judahite his- 
tory, a corresponding narrative was produced in the Ephraimite 
kingdom. During the reign of Jeroboam II (785-745), northern Is- 
rael attained prosperity and peace which it had not known since the 
division, nearly two hundred years before. As with Judah formerly, 
so now in Ephraim, circumstances favored a review of national for- 
tunes in a spirit of piety and pride. The task of the writers was sim- 
ilar to that of the Judahite scholars. Drawing on the same expanse 
of Hebrew lore, — popular tales, heroic and sacred legends, — they 
set forth the story of the Israelite nation with special reference to the 
northern tribes. Whether the Ephraimite authors modelled their 
narrative on the Judahite or worked independently, is uncertain; 
but in general, beginning with Abraham (Gen. 15), the history runs a 
parallel course. When the two narratives were combined to form JE 
(650-600), the Judahite contributed a far greater amount than the 
Ephraimite, and it relates many events not represented by E; but 
the northern history in its turn also embodies some material not used 
by other narrators. When disengaged from the complex which the 
editors wove so skilfully, it has its own interest and charm. 

Sprung from the same people, but separated in time and place, the 
two great narratives are similar in quality, yet with a difference. The 
sources were identical — the national traditions. But the concep- 
tions impressed upon this common material meanwhile had changed. 
For within the century that lay between the two, Israel had ripened 
in feeling and progressed in thought, under the urge and inspiration 
of prophecy. Swiftly within this span, the physical vehemence of 
Elijah and Elisha, northern contemporaries of the Judahite his- 

290 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


torians, was subtilized into the moral fire of Amos and the yearning 
tenderness of Hosea. So in literature, responsive to the changing 
temper, the simple clarity of the earlier narrative, alight with candid 
friendliness, gives place in the Ephraimite history to a more con- 
scious sensibility. The spontaneous sympathy that moves the Judah- 
ites creatively and envelops their personages as with an atmos- 
phere, is refined into pathos. At times, as in the Ephraimite account 
of the expulsion of Hagar (Gen. 21 8-20), contrasted with the Judah- 
ite parallel (Gen. 16), almost a theatric quality attaches to the repre- 
sentation, as though it were viewed through the intensifying medium 
of emotions willingly stirred. The Judahite manner is forthright, 
objective, actual, carrying its own appeal without implied comment. 
In the later history, the old frank humor is consumed by deliberate 
seriousness. The natural dignity without constraint with which the 
Judahites clothed the figures of long ago ranging in open spaces is 
raised to a formality of slower movement; ease and freedom yield to 
a soberer mood. The freshness of morning is clouded by the sombre 
meditations of a wiser day. The scene is hushed with solemnity. 
The personages, more sensitively endowed than in an earlier time, 
are invested with a grandeur reflected from the divine. 

More solemn, more grandiose, than the Judahite, is the Ephraim- 
ite conception of deity. God no longer comes down to walk familiarly 
with men. Veiled in cloud and thick darkness, he speaks from heaven. 
He reveals himself in dreams and visions; or he sends his messenger 
to make known his will. Where the earlier history represents Yah- 
weh as working by earthly means or agencies, the later ascribes all 
phenomena and effects to the immediate exercise of God’s omnipo- 
tence. So the natural is transformed into the supernatural. What 
was before engagingly commonplace becomes here impressively 
marvellous. In the measure that God is exalted and remote, he is 

291 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL ~ 


less intimate and picturesque. It is with a kind of loss that the his- 
tory mirrors the progress of Israel’s thought. Its underlying con- 
ceptions are spiritualized at the cost of narrative appeal. More ab- 
stractly theological, less accordant with daily practical experience, 
they are not so close to the imagination and the heart. Where the 
Judahite stories dwell lovingly upon the ritual customs of the old 
popular worship, the building of altars, wonted sacrifice, home feasts, 
and national festivals, which image forth the color and movement of 
Israel’s ways, the Ephraimite authors are concerned to show the 
course of divine revelation. Writing in an age when the zeal of Elijah 
still resounded, when the voice of Amos and the cry of Hosea were 
ringing with remonstrance and entreaty, the northern historians 
were inevitably quickened by prophetic doctrine. So Abraham and 
Moses are called prophets, as their highest title to distinction. Soa 
finer ethical conscience is disclosed in more scrupulous standards of 
conduct. Thus the Ephraimite writers ignore or palliate the details 
of questionable dealing on the part of the ancestors, as with Abra- 
ham’s deceit regarding his wife, who was also “‘his sister,”’ or Jacob’s 
treachery with Laban, which was not his free act but the effect of 
God’s intervention. In respect of ethical and spiritual conceptions, 
therefore, the northern narrative marks an advance upon the Judah- 
ite. If the earlier narrative did not exist, the later would be felt to be 
incomparable. Between the two at their best, is little to choose. 
Both attain the heights of purest style. In its more conscious man- 
ner of representation, in emotional coloring, in its grasp of human 
motives and its concepts of God’s will, the northern history exhibits 
a maturer art. 

A consummate example of Ephraimite narration is the offering of 
Isaac, recounted only in this northern history. 

And it came to pass after these things, that God did prove Abra- 

292 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


ham, and said unto him, Abraham; and he said, Here am I. And he 
said, Take now thy son, thine only son, whom thou lovest, even 
Isaac, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a 
burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. 
And Abraham rose early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and 
took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son; and he clave 
the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place 
of which God had told him. On the third day Abraham lifted up his 
eyes, and saw the place afar off. And Abraham said unto his young 
men, Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the lad will go yonder; 
and we will worship, and come again to you. And Abraham took the 
wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he 
took in his hand the fire and the knife; and they went both of them 
together. And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My 
father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold, the 
fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And 
Abraham said, God will provide himself the lamb for a burnt offering, 
my son: so they went both of them together. 

And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abra- 
ham built the altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound 
Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar, upon the wood. And Abra- 
ham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. And 
the angel of God called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, 
Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand 
upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know 
that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine 
only son, from me. And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and 
behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns: and 
Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt 
offering in the stead of his son. 


A deeply serious religious purpose animates the story, for it is 

designed to show that the God of Israel requires not the sacrifice of 

the first-born of men, as do Israel’s heathen neighbors. But withal, 

the story is very human, very intimate. It is a gently pressing tale, 
293 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


yet with anxious fearsome moments of suspense happily resolved. 
Here are the vividness of concrete detail, the explicit statement, the 
repetitions of phrase, dear to childlike listeners. A story like this, so 
simple, so dramatic, so restrained in pathos, so humanly appealing, 
so reverent of the divine, is hardly surpassed. 


Inspired by a purpose primarily and constrainingly religious, con- 
ceived too in patriotic zeal, the great Judahite and Ephraimite nar- 
ratives were intended also to be historical. For God manifested his 
will in events. In the simple view of Israel, with little of philosophic 
curiosity, Yahweh revealed himself less prevailingly in the laws of 
nature, so far as these were apprehended, than in the world of human 
affairs, in the acts of individuals, the fortunes of tribes, the destinies 
of nations. Faithfully wrought, yet the historical value of the nar- 
ratives must necessarily vary with the character of the sources em- 
ployed. History in the strict sense begins only with immediate ob- 
servation of events or direct knowledge of them derived from wit- 
nesses; the definition is complete when this knowledge is committed 
to writing. According as the record is close in time to the event is it 
likely to be trustworthy. In Israel, full historical record was not 
achieved until the reign of Solomon. Thence as the Hebrew narra- 
tives receded into the past, to that extent were they less and less able 
to attain historic fact. Authentic sources might well have been 
available for the accounts of David’s young manhood, the Philistine 
wars, the founding of the monarchy by Saul. Some old and genu- 
inely valuable material was embodied in the Book of Judges. Before 
that period lay only tradition. 

Unique and incomparable in the whole range of historical narra- 
tive is the brilliantly executed story of King David and his family in 
the later part of his reign (2 Sam. 9-20 and 1 K. 1-2). Written prob- 

294 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


= 


ably by a witness of the events, it is the earliest as it is the sovereign 
example in Israel. The literatures of Egypt and Babylonia offer no 
parallel. It is equalled only centuries later by the Greeks. The su- 
preme qualities of Hebrew historical writing, as they are exemplified 
in the oldest passages, are here manifested in their highest degree. 

This biography compasses a wider sweep than any other single unit 
of narrative. Beginning with David’s kindness to the crippled grand- 
son of Saul, it recounts the king’s private sin against Bathsheba and 
her husband, the wrong done by Prince Amnon to his sister, the reck- 
less deeds of the handsome, wayward Absalom, his pretentious re- 
bellion issuing in disaster and his pitiable death, the king’s flight 
from Jerusalem and his return, the revolt of the Benjaminites, the 
attempt of Prince Adonijah to seize his aged father’s throne, at last 
thwarted by the palace intrigue that established Solomon as king: 
then the tragedy, powerfully knotting the threads of fate, brings the 
leading personages to their violent end. Many scenes thus compose 
the drama; yet an extraordinary unity spans the whole. The several 
episodes are all attracted to the magnetic, compelling personality 
of David, which constitutes the dominant motive. In general, the 
Hebrew story-tellers were incapable of the long breath. The exten- 
sive scope and diversified interest of this narrative are the more 
remarkable. 

Resolved into its episodes, the biography of David, like all early 
Hebrew narration at its best, is distinguished by compression of de-_ 
tail, seemingly a kind of frugality of statement that counts the weight 
of words and seeks to make the effort of their use tell for its fullest 
value. The salient fact stands in bold relief, without half-lights. 
Invention exhausts itself quickly, unable to embroider the themes 
with ramifying incident. So too the urge to expression lacks the 
impetus to flower into long periods of subtle involution. Instead of 

295 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL © 


variety is simple insistence, and emphasis is won by repetition of 
phrase. The style takes on a certain swaying movement: then the 
swing comes suddenly to rest. A single sentence sums up the action, 
brief, inclusive, final. 


And Absalom dwelt two full years in Jerusalem; and he saw not 
the king’s face. Then Absalom sent for Joab, to send him to the 
king; but he would not come to him: and he sent again a second time, 
but he would not come. Therefore he said unto his servants, See, 
Joab’s field is near mine, and he hath barley there; go and set it on 
fire. And Absalom’s servants set the field on fire. Then Joab arose, 
and came to Absalom unto his house, and said unto him, Wherefore 
have thy servants set my field on fire? And Absalom answered Joab, 
Behold, I sent unto thee, saying, Come hither, that I may send thee 
to the king, to say, Wherefore am I come from Geshur? it were better 
for me to be there still: now therefore let me see the king’s face; and 
if there be iniquity in me, let him kill me. So Joab came to the king, 
and told him: and when he had called for Absalom, he came to the 
king, and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the king: 
and the king kissed Absalom. 


Such details as the narrator can command are seen vividly and 
presented with instant picture-making power. Moreover, the ten- 
sion of narrative statement finds release in frequent dialogue. The 
skill of the ancient story-tellers, reciting their tales with vocal stress 
and significant gesture before responsive listeners, here has-passed to 
the writer. His history has the directness, the swift succession of 
thrilling incident, the visual imaging that impregnate the narrative 
with dramatic intensity. 


Now David sat between the two gates: and the watchman went 
up to the roof of the gate unto the wall, and lifted up his eyes, and 
looked, and, behold, a man running alone. And the watchman cried, 
and told the king. And the king said, If he be alone, there is tidings 
in his mouth. And he came apace, and drew near. And the watch- 

296 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


man saw another man running: and the watchman called unto the 
porter, and said, Behold, another man running alone. And the king 
said, He also bringeth tidings. And the watchman said, Me thinketh 
the running of the foremost is like the running of Ahimaaz the son of 
Zadok. And the king said, He is a good man, and cometh with good 
tidings. 

And Ahimaaz called, and said unto the king, All is well. And he 
bowed himself before the king with his face to the earth, and said, 
Blessed be Yahweh thy God, which hath delivered up the men that 
lifted up their hand against my lord the king. And the king said, Is 
it well with the young man Absalom? And Ahimaaz answered, 
When Joab sent the king’s servant, even me thy servant, I saw a 
great tumult, but I knew not what it was. And the king said, Turn 
aside, and stand here. And he turned aside, and stood still. 

And, behold, the Cushite came; and the Cushite said, Tidings for 
my lord the king: for Yahweh hath avenged thee this day of all them 
that rose up against thee. And the king said unto the Cushite, Is it 
well with the young man Absalom? And the Cushite answered, The 
. enemies of my lord the king, and all that rise up against thee to do 
thee hurt, be as that young man is. And the king was much moved, 
and went up to the chamber over the gate, and wept: and as he went, 
thus he said, O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would 
God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son! 


With perfect simplicity of style, with immediacy of sight and object, 
with tense excitement controlled, the story speeds, and issues in reti- 
cent, great-hearted pity. The inner and the outer gates, the porter, 
the watchman mounting by the roof of the gate to the city wall; the 
messenger descried afar off running alone and coming apace, who 
answered evasively; the second runner, the negro Cushite, following 
close after, who dared to speak the terrible truth to the king; the 
anxious father, bitterly wronged by his son, but still his father; the 
grief of a noble broken spirit, and the cry of infinite, self-forgetting 
tenderness: here is supreme realization. 
297 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


With equal dramatic force, throughout the entire narrative, vivid- 
ness of action is complemented by trenchant portrayal of character. 
A company of persons shrewdly drawn move in thronging alert re- 
view. The figure of David is masterly. His faults are dire; his weak- 
nesses of excessive parental affection bring disaster; he yields to wills 
stronger than his own. Yet outtopping all in the greatness of his 
powers and nobility of soul, he compels admiration and love. A suit- 
able foil to David and likewise on grand scale is the war-dog Joab, 
man of blood, unsparing of persons in his devotion to the state. The 
lesser figures of the drama have their characteristic distinction. The 
three princes, Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah, are sharply individ- 
ualized. The outraged princess Tamar, garbed in woe; the faithful 
officer Uriah whose loyalty the king wantonly betrayed; the unscru- 
pulous Jonadab; the plausible counsellor Ahithophel, who yet had the 
courage to hang himself; the resourceful and cunning Hushai; the 
blackguard Shimei; the aged husbandman Barzillai, piously bringing 
of his harvests to sustain the fugitive king; the crippled grandson of 
Saul and his servant Ziba; the wise woman of Tekoa; the prophet 
Nathan; the priests Abiathar and Zadok, and Zadok’s son Ahimaaz: 
these are not all the actors who crowd the stirring scene. Here is the 
narrative manner of the old popular oral tales, but raised to its high- 
est energy and vastly extended in scope. The vision of Israel was in- 
tensely concrete; in the quick apprehension of onlookers, a deed was 
the person doing it. So after the ancient fashion of recital, now in his 
turn the writer presents history, not as a sequence of complex effects, 
but as men in action. The personages of the elder tale, two or three 
at most, were compacted of imagination. Here they have become a 
multitude, drawn from life. These people actually are. 


In the century between the memoirs of David’s court and the 
298 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


composition of the great Judahite history probably were written the 
narratives that make up the oldest strand midway in the Book of 
Samuel. These have many of the qualities that distinguish the biog- 
raphy. The stories of the youth David and of Saul equal it in charm, 
though they do not attain its brilliance and intricacy. Thence back- 
ward to Genesis, the material incorporated in the Judahite history 
kept much of the primitive form impressed upon it by the conditions 
of its origin and survival as oral tradition. In the sovereign biography 
of David, the earliest and the longest prose writing in Hebrew lit- 
erature, the art of historical narrative reaches the heights. 

The history of Solomon’s reign and of the divided kingdoms is 
continued and completed in the Book of Kings. The main sources, it 
is assumed, were a Chronicle of Solomon’s reign, state lists and an- 
nals, sanctuary records kept by priests, notably of the Temple at 
Jerusalem, Israelite narratives of Elijah and Elisha — relatively 
early, composed perhaps a generation or two after their time, — an 
Ephraimite history of the northern kingdom, a similar history of 
Judah, and possibly other Judahite documents. This material was 
worked over by many successive editors. The principal compiler, 
not long before the Exile, supplied the sharply definite frame into 
which it is compressed rigidly. Working in the spirit of the Deuter- 
onomic teaching, he selected such facts as could be made to serve his 
didactic purpose, and he stamped the whole with a distinctive style. 
The political history of the two kingdoms emerges incidentally and 
in fragmentary recital; social and cultural conditions are only im- 
plied. The chief emphasis falls upon matters that concerned the 
fortunes of the national religion; the kings are distinguished by what 
they did, or failed to do, to forward the purer worship of Yahweh. 
Escaping the severe constraint of the compiler’s scheme, however, 
are passages in the old wonderful manner. Resplendently the stories 

299 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


of Elijah, of Ahab, Jezebel, and Jehu, of Hezekiah’s fateful years, 
have the great qualities of narrative of which Israel was master. 

The literary charm and creative power of the Israelite scriptures 
overpass their value as historical records, though that is consid- 
erable. As a comprehensive history of the Hebrew people, it is not 
surprising that they are sadly inadequate. Yet these narratives are 
virtually the only documents from which such a history can be con- 
structed. Israel, alone of its contemporaries, left no inscriptions of 
historical importance. So far as the records of other nations reveal 
glimpses of this little people of the coastland, they tend to confirm 
the trustworthiness of Israel’s own memorials. The Hebrew narra- 
tives comprise a large measure of historic truth, — subject to some 
general limitations. The writers, for the greater part of their ma- 
terial, depended on oral tradition and legend; the compilers em- 
ployed documents of differing worth. Since their attitude was credu- 
lous rather than critical, they seem not to have been concerned to 
ascertain objective fact for its own sake. Profoundly persuaded of 
Israel’s destiny ordained by Yahweh, they set themselves to illus- 
trate it most effectively. The deeds of kings, the acts and words of 
prophets, the fortunes of peoples had significance only in their rela- 
tion to the providence of Yahweh. In view of the influence of religion 
upon Israelite culture, the zeal of these writers is explicable, but it 
resulted in a loss. Truth to fact, even if they could have recovered it, 
was subordinated to the lessons which their material might be made 
to teach. 

The development of their theme was based on a rough kind of se- 
quence. “After these things it came to pass.” Israel had no fixed 
date or era from which the historians might proceed in either direc- 
tion. Therefore their survey lacked temporal perspective; the rela- 


tion of events to one another was not determined with explicitness or 
300 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


precision. In the Book of Kings, the principal compiler attempted to 
follow a system of chronology by means of synchronisms between 
the parallel reigns in Ephraim and Judah, but the accuracy of his 
calculations is far from satisfying. Moreover, the historical narra- 
tives of Israel leave many questions unanswered. Happenings of 
utmost political importance are recounted incompletely, with no re- 
gard for proportion; others must be inferred. Social conditions are 
but a shadowy background, across which the persons of the story, 
briefly seen, move in swift action. History in the strict sense cannot 
be required of the traditions that compose Genesis, Exodus, Num- 
bers, and Joshua; with a core of fact, they are capable of divers inter- 
pretations. In the narratives which span the period when authentic 
record was possible, namely, in Samuel, Kings, and perhaps some 
parts of Judges, are moments of brightest illumination; then ob- 
scurity or empty darkness. So the long current of historical continuity 
often loses itself under ground, and reappears in broken passages 
which mirror back the world of Israel in wavering images. 
Despite the fragmentary character of Israel’s narratives, the 
authors and notably the compilers had a kind of philosophy of his- 
tory. They saw in men’s lives individually and through generations 
the working of a principle. The forces governing the world they con- 
ceived to be the will of Yahweh. In the oldest documents this belief 
finds expression unconsciously. Quite simply and naturally Yahweh 
overrules the affairs of men. Here the marvellous, proper both to the 
primitive and to the sophisticated, does not figure. In the genuinely 
original passages, no trace of tendency modifies the facts, as the 
writer is able to report them; the old stories, told for their own 
interest, reflect serenely the innate piety of Israel. In later ages, 
directed by the powerful influence of Deuteronomy, simple belief 
became a doctrine, to which men’s present lives and the facts of his- 
301 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


tory must be made to conform. The didactic purpose of the com- 
pilers, to whom was due the apparent unity that binds the diverse ele- 
ments of the narratives into a continuous whole, obscures the orig- 
inal historic import of their material; but in compensation, it serves 
to bring into higher relief the character of Israel’s genius. The view 
of life expressed by the Deuteronomic writers was the unfoldment of 
that responsiveness to religious appeal which was the peculiar gift of 
the Hebrew people. Their conception of the divine developed pro- 
gressively through the centuries. But from the beginning, as it was 
a controlling influence in their daily affairs, so it shaped their lit- 
erature. Because of their predominant interest in religion, their 
history was a religious history, in substance and in form. Their his- 
torical narratives, substantially true to the determining facts of 
their national experiences, were preserved as sacred scriptures. These 
scriptures in their own age were unequalled for literary beauty. But 
inspiring them, the thought of God’s presence with men, which 
moulded Israel’s writings, lends them an elevation that distinguishes 
them from the literature of all other peoples. 


Hebrew prose style attains another level in Deuteronomy. The 
Book of the Law, discovered in the Temple in 621, was later by a 
century than the Ephraimite history. Within this period, great 
events had violently affected the nation. The northern kingdom had 
been swept away before the conquering might of the Assyrians. 
Judah alone survived as the chosen people of Yahweh to cherish 
the traditions of the past and to carry forward the work appointed 
them. The theme of the Judahite and the Ephraimite histories, 
God’s wondrous care of Israel, was taken up by the prophets, Amos, 
Hosea, Micah, and Isaiah, who charged the message with larger con- 
sequences and impassioned it with heightened utterance. Yet deaf to 

302 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


all warning and entreaty, the people had strayed from the right path, 
and for more than a generation, led by King Manasseh, they had 
abandoned themselves utterly to the worship of false gods. In order 
to recall the people to their true allegiance, it was not enough merely 
to formulate the Law anew. It was necessary also to smite the con- 
science and arouse the will. The Law, given by Moses, in so far as it 
had failed to compel loyalty, needed to be reénforced. A new code, 
therefore, but seeming still to bear the authority of Moses, was 
promulgated as the Book of the Law. Here statutes and ordinances 
are set forth in the form of direct address, supplemented by urgent 
petition. Statement expands into exhortation. The stark majesty 
of legal formula is made to burn with the fervor of prophetic elo- 
quence. 

In content the Book of Deuteronomy combines history and law; 
in form it is oratorical discourse. The review of Israel’s wanderings 
in the wilderness and east of Jordan, attributed to Moses as the 
speaker, is based on the great Judahite and Ephraimite narratives. 
The code draws largely upon traditional law, at the same time that 
it propounds a radical innovation. But in temper and style the book 
differs markedly from the underlying documents. The elder stories 
were told with gentle simplicity and reticence of phrase; the ancient 
statutes were declared with specific brevity. In quite another spirit 
the authors of Deuteronomy set themselves to their task, and they 
employ another manner. They aim to state the Law in such terms 
as shall command the people’s eager acquiescence. To this end, the 
mere statute is amplified into a plea; to this end also the facts of 
history serve for argument. Yahweh loved Israel, and chose it out of 
all peoples for his own possession. The deliverance from bondage in 
Egypt and the mercies vouchsafed in the wilderness testify to his 
love, which fails not, despite the people’s ingratitude and faithless- 

303 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ness. Let Israel penitently return, and heed his Law. Again and again 
sounds the refrain: “Thou shalt remember that thou wast a bond- 
man in the land of Egypt, and Yahweh thy God redeemed thee: 
therefore I command thee this thing to-day.” The Book of the Law 
rests its deepest appeal on loving-kindness. Awakening the con- 
science, persuading the will, it also speaks to the heart. 

The motive of the book determines its style. A code of law is an- 
nounced as a prophetic message. Impelled by the necessity of exigent 
persuasion, more acutely conscious of an audience than were the 
earlier historians, the authors of Deuteronomy suffuse their discourse 
with vehement emotion. On the lips of these prophetic law-givers, 
the Hebrew sentence develops unsuspected resources. The limpid 
flow of the elder narrative, here gathering weight and momentum, 
rolls into billowing oratory. Rising with cumulative power, clause 
piled upon clause for the sheer joy of it, the sustained sweep of 
utterance, aglow with the fervency of passionate purpose, attains 
the highest energy of rhythm, breadth of eloquence, and fulness of 
sonority. 


For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, 
since the day that God created man upon the earth, and from the one 
end of heaven unto the other, whether there hath been any such 
thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it. Did ever a 
people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as 
thou hast heard, and live? Or hath God assayed to go and take him 
a nation from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs, and by 
wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched 
out arm, and by great terrors, according to all that Yahweh your God 
did for you in Egypt before your eyes? Unto thee it was showed, that 
thou mightest know that Yahweh he is God; there is none else beside 
him. Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice, that he might 
instruct thee: and upon earth he made thee to see his great fire; and 
thou heardest his words out of the midst of the fire. And because he 


304 


SCRIPTURE IN THE WEAVING 


loved thy fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them, and 
brought thee out with his presence, with his great power, out of 
Egypt; to drive out nations from before thee greater and mightier 
than thou, to bring thee in, to give thee their land for an inheritance, 
as at this day. Know therefore this day, and lay it to thine heart, 
that Yahweh he is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath: 
there is none else. And thou shalt keep his statutes, and his com- 
mandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well 
with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest 
prolong thy days upon the land, which Yahweh thy God giveth thee, 
for ever. 


The influence of the Deutercnomic purpose and style upon the 
weaving of the Hebrew scriptures ranged far. Deuteronomy itself, of 
all the legal and historical books of early Israel, is most nearly of one 
piece. It was, moreover, the first book to be accepted as sacred. 
Its diction, deriving from both narrative and prophecy, strikingly 
distinguishes it from all preceding documents. A consummation of 
Hebrew eloquence, it is also an innovation and marks a beginning. 
Henceforward the writings of Israel bore in their origin as well as 
in their final adaptation a predominantly religious character. So too 
the potent stimulus of the Deuteronomic manner affected subsequent 
writers. Notably the import and the style of the Book of the Law 
served for a model to the compilers who edited Judges and Kings, but 
with a loss of primary inspiration. For in their manipulation of their 
documents, the editors were concerned rather with the formal appli- 
cation of its precepts than with the emotional and spiritual fervor 
enkindling their great exemplar. Active as was its influence upon its 
own and later generations, yet in the extent of Israel’s scriptures 
from Genesis to Kings, of which it forms a part, the Book of Deuter- 
onomy has no parallel. To the imagery and force of the early poems, 
to the charm of the old narratives, it adds a surgent majesty that 

305 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


crowns it as the glory of Hebrew prose. In rhetorical power it is 
matched only by prophetic speech. 

With the discourses of the prophets, Israel had initiated another 
order of literature, of a special quality and interest. Its significance 
may be best appreciated as it is viewed in relation to prophetic aims 
and achievements. The work of the prophets in its turn, however, 
receives its fullest illumination as it is viewed in its contrast to the 


Law. 


XIV 
JUSTICE AND LAW 


Down the centuries, from timeless beginnings in the desert through 
the period of settlement in Canaan and the varied fortunes of the 
monarchy to the final overthrow of the state, Israel wrought for itself 
progressively its appropriate forms of social organization. At every 
moment of its history, Hebrew society was subject to the controls 
established by custom or enactment for its governance. The tribal 
group, the settled community, the nation under its kings, had each 
its system for the regulation of the common welfare and of individual 
conduct, — a system which served as law. The law that Israel rec- 
ognized at any epoch was a measure of the kind and degree of culture 
that the people had then attained. 

Among the tribes, the basic unity of society was the family. The 
power of the father over his household, over his wives, his sons and 
daughters, and his slaves, was absolute. An aggregate of families 
constituted a clan. Here the heads of houses were equal in relation 
to one another, but all accepted the rule of a chieftain or sheikh. In 
his turn the sheikh was advised by a council of leading clansmen, 
distinguished for their wealth, their personal qualities, or their wis- 
dom. Though not necessarily old men, they were termed elders. 

In this primitive society, the dispensing of justice was a simple 
matter. Ultimate reference was to tribal custom, so old that the 
memory of man ran not to the contrary, forever inexorable and coer- 
cive. Within the compass of all-inclusive custom, the decisions of 
the judge in individual cases furnished immediate precedent. The 
disputants submitted their cause to the judgment of sheikh or elder, 

307 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


who decided the issue according to custom or precedent or his own 
sense of right. The judge himself, however, had no power to enforce 
his decree. Compulsion to obedience and execution of the judgment 
lay with the clan as a whole. Failure on the part of the condemned to 
fulfil the sentence was attended by such punishment as the clan by 
the pressure of public opinion and common action might impose, even 
to expulsion from clan membership, with its terrible consequences. 
Lacking the protection of his clan, the individual was exposed to the 
inevitable hostility of all other tribes. So the murderer Cain, driven 
forth, cried out, ‘““My punishment is greater than I can bear... I 
shall be a fugitive and a wanderer in the earth; and it will come to 
pass, that whosoever findeth me will slay me.” 

When the Hebrew tribes entered Canaan to possess the land, they 
were no longer simple nomads of the unchanging desert. Upon their 
escape from bondage in Egypt, they had sojourned for some years in 
the southern wilderness. Here, so Israel’s historians told, under the 
leadership of Moses the several tribes were brought together into a 
conscious unity; and they accepted Yahweh as their sole God. As 
their communal organization became more complex than the needs of 
lesser wandering clans required, so one judge no longer sufficed for 
the numerous people. Accordingly Moses chose out able men and 
made them rulers to judge the people at all seasons; the hard cases 
they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged them- 
selves. 

The instance thus ascribed to the sojourn in the wilderness was 
typical of the judicial office in Israel. With the settlement in Canaan, 
the tribal elders were succeeded by the elders of the city or of the 
local village community. Under the monarchy, the king was the 
supreme judge, but accessible at all times to the humblest of his sub- 
jects. So the wise woman of Tekoa appeared before David to seek a 

308 


JUSTICE AND LAW 


stay of the vengeance her clan were about to exact upon her guilty 
son; and the two harlots disputing possession of the infant, referred 
their quarrel to King Solomon for adjudication. So Prince Absalom, 
aiming to supplant his father David in the affections of the people, 
stood by the way of the gate. “And it was so, that, when any man 
had a suit which should come to the king for judgment, then 
Absalom called unto him, and said, Of what city art thou? And he 
said, Thy servant is of one of the tribes of Israel. And Absalom said 
unto him, See, thy matters are good and right; but there is no man 
deputed of the king to hear thee. Absalom said moreover, Oh that I 
were made judge in the land, that every man which hath any suit or 
cause might come unto me, and I would do him justice!”’ Thus easy 
was it in principle that a complainant should obtain a hearing. 

In cases of unusual difficulty which fell beyond the competence 
of the elder to decide, either by reference to custom and precedent, 
or on his own initiative, the matter was brought “before God.” 
Here the priest was judge. Decision was obtained by recourse to the 
sacred lot, through the instrumentality of the Ephod and the Urim 
and Thummim. The frequent mention of these implements in the 
scriptures still leaves obscure the method of their manipulation. The 
priest also at the sanctuary, like the elder in the gate, as his wisdom 
and probity enabled, might render judgment, pronouncing sentence 
upon the criminal or awarding justice between man and man. 
Along with the precedents established by civil judges, there devel- 
oped on the basis of individual decisions by the priests a mass of 
precepts, accepted as divinely given, which was termed the Torah, 
that is, “direction” or law. Though primarily concerned with ritual 
matters, the law enunciated by the priests was extended to civil 
cases as well. In a sense, too, civil law itself was divine law, for all 
the affairs of life lay under the immediate supreme governance of 

309 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Yahweh. More and more, it may be supposed, immemorial custom 
yielded its authority to the Torah, whose spokesmen and agents were 
the priests. It was natural therefore that their jurisdiction should 
win for itself increasing prestige. Whereas the civil judgeship was not 
strictly hereditary but was elective, the priesthood was a continuing 
body with its own persistent traditions and inherited lore, and it was 
constituted of the learned class. Hence it followed that in time the 
priests became the especial custodians of Israel’s law. 

During the later years of the Judahite monarchy, there was at 
Jerusalem a court composed of priests and civilians (Deut. 17 8 f.). 
And now, according to the prescript in the Book of the Law of 
Josiah’s reign, the civil judges were elected by the people (Deut. 1618). 
Though its powers are not specified, the court at Jerusalem probably 
supplemented rather than superseded the local judges of old time. 
That its exact functions are not indicated is not surprising, for in 
general the relations of the various judicial authorities to one an- 
other, the elders, the priests, the court at Jerusalem, the king, are 
nowhere defined. 

Judicial procedure in Israel kept the open-air simplicity of its 
origins. The scene was animated, resounding, and colorful, with fig- 
ures in plastic groupings. In the gate and marketplace of the city 
sat the elders in judgment. There in the presence of crowding on- 
lookers, appeared plaintiff and defendant, the one standing at the 
right, the other in soiled garments at the left, to argue their cause, — 
it may be fancied with passionate voice and vehement gesture. The 
accuser stated his complaint; it lay with the accused to establish his 
innocence. For proof were required at least two witnesses. Hence 
the emphasis in both the written law and the prophets on the integ- 
rity of witnesses as well as of the judge. In the very oldest Hebrew 
code of law it is written: ‘Thou shalt not take up a false report: put 

310 


JUSTICE AND LAW 


not thy hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. ... Keep 
thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and the righteous slay 
thou not.” (Ex. 231, 7.) Ifthe witness testified falsely, then the same 
punishment was visited upon him that he had thought to bring upon 
the accused. Having heard the pleas and supporting testimony, and 
having made diligent inquisition, the judge rendered his decision, 
pronounced the sentence, and delivered the convicted man to his 
accuser to exact the penalty in a matter between man and man, or if 
it was a sentence of death, to the whole people, to whom fell the duty 
of executing the judgment. Death was inflicted usually by stoning. 
The hand of the witnesses should be the first upon the condemned, 
and afterward the hand of all the people. Among a quick-mettled 
folk like Israel, it may be inferred that the judges were much occu- 
pied. Because of the public manner of trial, award, and execution of 
the sentence, partaking of something akin to an amusement and a 
spectacle, doubtless the people were always keenly interested in the 
administration of law. 

Controlled by custom, guided by precedent, the elders rendering 
their decisions in the open place of the gate, and equally the priests 
at the sanctuary, were Israel’s first law-givers. The precedents, on 
which their judgments were based, or which in turn their judgments 
created, were transmitted orally from generation to generation. Not 
until Israel began to have a recorded literature in the early days of 
the monarchy was the case-law founded on these decisions codified in 
writing. The work of codification, throughout the land and over 
successive periods, was done probably by the priests. As the learned 
class, instructed in the art of writing, they were peculiarly fitted for 
the task; as themselves judges, equipped with all the knowledge of 
their calling, they had immediate access to the long accumulation of 
traditional law. From the codes thus cast in written form, at differ- 

311 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ent epochs and of varying import, were drawn the legal precepts, 
ritual, civil, and criminal, which were woven into the Hebrew scrip- 
tures. 

In the transfiguring retrospect of later generations, Moses was 
priest and judge and legislator, in supreme manifestation. To him, 
as the foremost instance, was ascribed the promulgation of the entire 
Hebrew law. Every statute, every code, every book of legislation 
was endued with the unique sanction and authority of his mighty 
name. Great as was the achievement of Moses in the moulding of 
early Israel, yet just how much of the legislation that the narratives 
place at Sinai-Horeb may be properly attributed to him is not deter- 
mined. Only a very small part is suited to the tribes sojourning in the 
wilderness before they entered Canaan to become tillers of the soil. 
Law in Israel, as among all nations, developed in response to the 
unfolding and changing needs of the people through the centuries. 


Embedded in the Ephraimite narrative of the wilderness sojourn 
is a collection of laws (Ex. 20 23-23 19), which is the oldest code in 
Israel that has survived. This code is named in the reference to it in 
Exodus 24 7 the “Book of the Covenant.” The collection is not all 
of a single cast. In form and in purpose, the ordinances fall within 
two principal categories, the “Judgments” and the “Words.” The 
Judgments are instances of case-law in matters civil and criminal. 
Phrased according to a definite formula, — if a certain act be com- 
mitted or a certain condition obtain, then so and so shall be the pen- 
alty — they are quite specific in their application. The Words, on 
the other hand, uttered as direct commands, concern for the most 
part ritual matters; a few have a moral bearing. “Three times in the 
year all thy males shall appear before the Lord Yahweh.” “A 
sojourner shalt thou not wrong, neither shalt thou oppress him.” 

312 


_ JUSTICE AND LAW 


The Words number in detail over twenty. In the Judahite narra- 
tive in Exodus 34, is given a similar series, now numbering at least 
twelve, most of them closely parallel to the Ephraimite version. In 
their present narrative setting, they are referred to as “the ten 
words,” written on two tables of stone. Hence it is reasonable to 
infer that originally they constituted a decalogue: law was promul- 
gated in this form later in Israel, and possibly also by the Canaan- 
ites; cut on two tables of stone, set up at the sanctuary, each table 
engraved with five commands, corresponding perhaps to the five 
fingers of each hand, the precepts might thus be easily brought to 
remembrance. Just which commands originally made up the Ten 
Words it is now difficult if not impossible to determine. For con- 
venience, however, the group of ritual precepts included in the Book 
of the Covenant may be termed the primitive decalogue. 

Neither the Judahite nor the Ephraimite writer was the author 
of this ritual code; in its present shape it was derived from older orig- 
inals. The primitive decalogue was written down, no doubt in vari- 
ant formulas, probably as early as the reign of Solomon. That it was 
not declared unto Israel in the wilderness is evident from the fact 
that most of the commands presuppose Israel’s way of life to be that 
of a people settled upon the soil. Two or three may be appropriate 
to the desert: “The first-born of thy sons shalt thou give unto me; 
likewise shalt thou do with thy sheep.”’ “‘ Neither shall the fat of my 
feast remain all night until the morning.” “Thou shalt not boil a 
kid in its mother’s milk.’”’ These may indeed go back to the Mosaic 
period or before. That on the other hand the code is genuinely old, 
belonging to Israel’s early years in Canaan, is indicated by its im- 
port. Its prescriptions bear upon matters of ritual; and in the elder 
days, before the prophets preached their doctrines of moral values, 


the emphasis in religion was placed upon correct ceremonial. Yet 
313 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the repetition of its precepts in all the later codes and books of legis- 
lation proves the fundamental significance of this primitive deca- 
logue. In a practical sense it served as the corner-stone of the whole 
vast structure of Hebrew ritual law. 

Similarly the Judgments included in the Book of the Covenant, 
by a gradual process perhaps, and in divers elements at more than 
one sanctuary, had begun to be committed to writing by the time of 
Solomon. Ultimately they were combined with the Words, and then 
both together were incorporated in the Ephraimite narrative. In its 
present form, the Book of the Covenant, itself not an organic whole, 
is a compilation from old sources, which may in their own time have 
constituted independent codes, current self-sufficingly. Naturally 
both groups of ordinances, the Words and the Judgments, at the 
hands of editors underwent many changes, — omissions of original 
laws, additions by other compilers and redactors, and rearrange- 
ment or confusion of the traditional order. The laws set forth in the 
Judgments have reference to the social conditions of Israel in Canaan 
through the period prior to the establishment of the monarchy; and 
presumably they continued in force until they gave place to the legis- | 
lation of Deuteronomy. They imply that the people dwell in houses 
and possess property in farming land. Israel, enjoined to just con- 
duct toward the resident alien, is therefore already master of Canaan. 
There is as yet, however, no allusion to the work of the artisan or to 
trade. In general, upon the background of procedure is cast no 
shadow of the commanding judicial figure of a king. 

The Book of the Covenant reveals something of the Israelites’ 
manner of thought and life in the earlier days. Yahweh alone should 
be their God; but he might be worshipped at many altars throughout 
the countryside, though these must be of the simplest fashion, of 
earth or unhewn stone, as suited a single-hearted, primitive people, 

314 


JUSTICE AND LAW 


uncontaminated by the frippery of Canaanite civilization. Like 
other gods, Yahweh demanded sacrifice and offerings and the tribute 
of great yearly feasts. In merely ritual matters, then, Yahweh was 
still but the god of a farmer folk, in themselves undistinguished 
from neighboring peoples by any spiritual elevation. But along the 
farther reaches of the code, appeal was made also to obligations of 
moral constraint, which found expression in the ordinances of the 
civil law. 

The Judgments prescribe certain rules of conduct in the relations 
between man and man; in cases of misdemeanor or crime, they define 
the penalty. The code deals in the main with the treatment due to 
slaves; with crimes punishable by death, namely, murder, man-steal- 
ing, smiting or cursing a parent, the practice of sorcery, unnatural 
lust, and, if this is not a later interpolation, sacrifice to other gods 
than Yahweh; with injuries to persons; with damage to animals or 
caused by them; with theft; and with breach or negligence of trust. 
The penalties provided are based on the principle of retaliation; and 
of restitution where possible, either equal or severalfold, or of com- 
pensation. The spirit of the old desert law of blood-revenge still 
rules. “Thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand 
for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe 
for stripe.” Instances of the working of this law occurred in the time 
of David. “So Joab and Abishai his brother slew Abner, because he 
had killed their brother Asahel at Gibeon in the battle.” And the 
woman of Tekoa reported to the king: “Thy handmaid had two sons, 
and they two strove together in the field, and there was none to part 
| them, but the one smote the other, and killed him. And, behold, the 
whole family is risen against thy handmaid, and they say, Deliver 
him that smote his brother, that we may kill him for the life of his 
brother whom he slew.”’ In practice, however, responding to the 

315 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


temper of a milder age, the fiercely vindictive exactions of olden 
time tended to yield to requital by compensation. 

The bearing of the Judgments upon the rights of persons reflects 
the social concepts of the period. Only the master of a household had 
independent legal standing. The wife was absolutely subordinate to 
her husband; a daughter was the material possession of her father. 
The life of a slave was of far lesser value; injury to his person was 
regarded as damage to property. In general, the cases which the 
code had in view were the happenings of familiar everyday experience 
within the range of a farmer people. The logical development of 
laws in their reference to detail is manifestly incomplete. Even in 
its broadest scope, the code as a whole mirrors a simple society, 
wherein neighbor dwelt by neighbor in friendly intercourse, with no 
wide outlook upon a mature and turbulent world. 

The Judgments recorded in the Book of the Covenant were not 
the creation of Israel alone nor peculiar to this one people. They had 
their parallels, yet with differences, in the prescripts of an imposing 
code older by a thousand years. Before the Hebrews entered Canaan, 
the westland had been for centuries pervaded by the ripe culture 
of Babylonia. The outstanding figure of Babylonian history was 
King Hammurabi, who reigned about 2100 B.c. As not the least 
of his achievements, he promulgated a code of legislation, cut in en- 
during stone, which in the measure of its relevance to local conditions 
must have served as the law of his far-flung empire. So the Canaan- 
ites, known to have submitted to Babylonian influence in other 
respects, may be assumed to have accepted also the dominance of 
Hammurabi’s legislation. When the Israelites became masters of 
Canaan, they fell heir to the established culture. Laws regarding 
the incidents of settled life, the ownership of land, the practice of 


farming with its attendant liability to damage of cattle and crops, 
316 


JUSTICE AND LAW 


had met the necessities of the Canaanites from an elder time; and 
Israel had but to adapt these laws to its own conditions. In com- 
parison with the sovereign code which had left its impress on the 
westland, the Book of the Covenant is but a fragment, drawn from a 
peasant society. It suited the mature complexity of the vast Baby- 
lonian civilization that the imperial code should be far more compre- 
hensive and advanced than the Israelites required for their own 
simple control. But to the extent of their needs, the debt to Baby- 
lonia, even if indirect, is unmistakable. The sentence forms in which 
are cast the laws of both codes are precisely similar; and more than 
half of the Judgments of the Book of the Covenant are closely anal- 
ogous to Hammurabi’s laws, though with variations in detail. From 
the penalties imposed it is evident that the legislation of the great 
commercial empire sets a much larger value upon property; the little 
farmer people held a higher regard for human life. Yet whatever 
their intermediate debt to Canaan and Babylonia, the Israelites 
finally moulded their law to their own spirit. 

The code of Hammurabi comprised only civil and criminal legis- 
lation. It was characteristic of the genius of Israel that its earliest 
recorded laws should be already inspired by moral earnestness. The 
hard demands of justice for the regulation of society were mollified 
to pity. The stranger must not be oppressed; and Yahweh would 
hear the cry of the afflicted widow and fatherless child. Each seventh 
year, the land and the vineyard and the oliveyard should be left 
fallow, that the poor might eat of their fruits, and after the poor, then 
the beasts of the field. To an enemy, even, the Israelite should bring 
back the ox or the ass that had strayed; and he should release the 
too-heavy burden of an ass belonging to one that hated him. This is 
more than simple justice could require. And justice itself, indeed, 
must be kept pure. The witness must not testify falsely; the judge 

317 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


must take no bribe, nor wrest the judgment due to the poor in his 
cause. The moral elevation to which the law thus seemed to aspire, 
rose out of Israel’s conception of law as the direct expression of God’s 
will. Between civil ordinances and ritual commands there was es- 
sentially no distinction; both were deeply based in religion. Man’s 
obligation to God included within its reference every act of life. 
Justice and righteousness alike were obedience to Yahweh. So all 
law was regarded as divinely given. Upon the decisions of priest or 
elder brooded the august sanctity of the will of Yahweh, the judge 
supreme. As the people advanced in the knowledge of God with the 
lapse of centuries, they shaped their law progressively to conform 
to their expanding apprehension of his moral nature. The way to 
growth lay ever open. The code recorded in the Book of the Cove- 
nant marked only a beginning. 


Toward the middle of the eighth century, Israel’s thought about 
the nature of God and the obligations of human conduct received a 
new and powerful impetus. The contemporary reigns of Jeroboam 
II in the northern kingdom and of Azariah in Judah, which embraced 
more than a generation, were a time of surgent prosperity. Recoy- 
ered from the exhaustions of protracted wars, the nation had swiftly 
grown rich. The favored classes added to their wealth by extortion 
and oppression; and they perverted justice to their own corrupt ends. 
The triumphant materialism of the age was reflected in its religious 
practices. To conciliate their God, the people abandoned themselves 
to the observance of elaborate ritual, to crowded sacrificial feasts and 
lavish abundance of offerings. Suddenly, a voice was raised in denun- 
ciation and warning. At Beth-el, a royal seat and ancient sanctuary, 
the shrine of a golden bull that imaged forth the presence of Yahweh 
to his worshippers, there appeared in the midst of the festal throng the 

318 


JUSTICE AND LAW 


gaunt figure of a herdsman from the desolate Judean highlands, with 
a flaming message of doom and call to repentance. “I hate, I despise 
your feasts, and I will take no delight in your solemn assemblies. .. . 
But let justice roll down as waters, and righteousness as a never- 
failing stream!’’ After Amos came Hosea and Micah and Isaiah, 
with their cumulative messages of the ethical supremacy of Yahweh, 
no longer satisfied with merely ceremonial homage, and of the moral 
accountability of men. 

In response to the new teaching, the spiritual leaders of Israel pro- 
mulgated a new brief code of law. Two versions of it are preserved in 
the scriptures. One is wrought into a later strand of the Ephraimite 
narrative (Ex. 20 1-17); the other inaugurates the book of legislation 
comprised in Deuteronomy (5 7-21). This code is known to-day and 
cherished as the Ten Commandments or the Decalogue. According 
to both the narratives in which the Decalogue is cited, the Words 
were communicated by Yahweh to Moses at the sacred mountain. 
But a scrutiny of the code reveals the period of its origin and the 
sources of its inspiration. 

With sovereign simplicity and utter finality of phrase, the Deca- 
logue formulates as divine commands what Israel had thus far won of 
spiritual knowledge and moral insight. An age-long struggling ex- 
perience woven of aspiration, of repeated lapses and toilsome ad- 
vance, preceded the coming of the great prophets. Theirs are the 
doctrines, and not the concepts of an earlier time, which the Ten 
Words declare imperatively. In the spirit of the prophetic teaching, 
the ritual prescripts of the primitive code, here reénforced by moral 
incentives, are transformed into the demands of a just but loving 
God. No longer a mere tribal deity, Yahweh now despises the peo- 
ple’s feasts and rejects their sacrificial offerings; he requires of men 
to do justly, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with their God. 

319. 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


The Sabbath in the older time was a day of rest and refreshment of 
the body; now Israel is enjoined to observe the Sabbath day to keep 
it holy. In the domain of conduct, the Judgments of the Book of the 
Covenant, applying to specific instances, here give place to abstract 
absolute commands of general validity. In the stead of a penalty for 
a son who curses or smites his parents, runs the stark imperative, 
“Honor thy father and thy mother.” So likewise with other funda- 
mentals of right action, summed up in the single unqualified “Thou 
shalt not.’’ The details of case-law are sunk beneath the surface, 
as they serve but to support the overarching span reared upon them. 
Manifestly the rise from the specific concrete instance to the abstract 
general principle was a long progress. 

It was some five centuries after Moses rendered judgment for the 
tribes sojourning in the wilderness that the Decalogue was promul- 
gated as Israel’s rule of life. Out of the vicissitudes of this long 
history the nation was moving toward the heights, guided by its 
great teachers. Moulded in the fervor of their zeal, the brief code 
uttered the loftiest concepts of religion and morality that Israel had 
so far achieved. The Ten Commandments, though distinguished, 
far beyond the law of other nations, for their spiritual and ethical 
nobility, had reference, as designed, only to Israel. But the medium 
which this people fashioned for its own uses was capable of a larger 
expressiveness, in the measure that a richer experience of God and 
his ways with men charged it with a wider import. Though the Deca- 
logue was limited in scope, and the people which conceived it might — 
still pass to fuller knowledge of the divine nature and purposes, yet 
by virtue of its supreme rightness, what Israel wrought out for itself 
was able to become universal. 


_Israel sinned against the light. The exalted teaching of the proph- 
320 


JUSTICE AND LAW 


ets seemed to have proved only a counsel of perfection; and the people 
went their old unheeding licentious ways. King Hezekiah, indeed, 
responsive to prophetic doctrine, had attempted to purify the na- 
tional worship. But his son Manasseh, during a reign of more than 
half a century, by his own example and active tolerance opened wide 
the gates to all manner of recreant practices. To stem the flood of the 
old popular license which swept back over the nation, to check the 
swift prevalence of idolatry and foreign cults, there remained to the 
partisans of Yahweh a means of counter-attack. The law given to 
Israel of ancient time had lapsed into general neglect; it was neces- 
sary, therefore, to promulgate the law anew, reénforced by more 
potent sanctions. The prophetic reformers, aided by priests still 
faithful to the pure worship of Yahweh, drafted the code which was 
“found” in the Temple in the eighteenth year of King Josiah and 
solemnly proclaimed by him as the law of the land. 

The new code, preserved in the present book of Deuteronomy, 
aimed primarily at the reform of Israel’s religion. Its purpose was to 
reinstate the true worship of Yahweh, at once retrieving its ancient 
purity and enduing it with enhanced majesty and power. Toward 
the fulfilment of this purpose it was necessary to formulate the law 
of Yahweh anew, with reference to the needs of the present. In order 
to make the law prevail, it was further necessary to invest the state- 
ment of it with supreme sanction and adequate compulsions. Hence 
the book was attributed to Moses, the first and greatest of Israel’s 
law-givers, speaking in the name and on behalf of Yahweh himself. 
The observance of the law was enjoined by promise of reward and 
threat of punishment, supplemented by appeal to the enlightened 
conscience and humane sympathies of a people who should have 
profited by the teaching of its spiritual leaders. Though their pur- 
pose was primarily religious, the reformers based their program still 

321 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


more broadly. In Israel’s concept of the regulation of life, ritual law 
was not distinguished from civil law; both proceeded from the will 
of Yahweh. The drafting of the new code, therefore, found occasion 
for the restatement of ordinances governing the people in all rela- 
tions. 

The legislation of Deuteronomy, however, is not a systematic or 
comprehensive codex. Later than the Book of the Covenant by 
several centuries, it draws largely upon the older Judgments. Various 
minor collections, as the lack of order indicates, were probably also 
included; and the new code may have formulated certain legal usages 
hitherto unwritten. Some of the old decisions are repeated without 
change; but in general the ancient prescripts are modified to suit 
the later conditions. 

Many laws were decreed as a necessary consequence of the ex- 
clusive sanctity bestowed by the new code upon the Temple at Jeru- 
salem. In civil and criminal matters, the book deals with such di- 
verse subjects as the year of release, the rights of slaves, the appoint- 
ment of judges, the kingship, the law of prophets, divination and 
magic, asylum for the manslayer, landmarks, witnesses, military 
service and war, the treatment of female captives, strayed animals 
and lost property, adultery, seduction, and incest, divorce, the 
“levirate marriage,” usury, pledges, just weights, and many details 
of apparently trifling importance, of which birds’ nests and parapets 
upon house-roofs are typical examples. Indeed, the prescripts of 
civil law seem intended, less to constitute a complete and orderly 
codex, than to serve as illustrations of the underlying principles 
which the book is designed to inculcate. Though the legislation as a 
whole is fragmentary and unmethodical, it is distinguished through- 
out by its earnestness on behalf of the humane spirit which should 


animate the administration of law. Justice should be tempered by 
~ 322 


_ JUSTICE AND LAW 


mercy. And from regard of justice, because a just God required it, 
should spring right conduct toward one’s fellow men. Already in 
the earlier codes, a sense of Yahweh’s immediate presence and con- 
trolling power had guided the judges of the people; and their deci- 
sions reflected something of the gleam, which their eager searching was 
able to discern, of God’s moral character. Day broadened with the 
centuries. Responsive to the teaching of the prophets, the legisla- 
tion of Deuteronomy was profoundly expressive of Israel’s genius in 
its religious passion and its enlightened, great-hearted appeal to love, 
divine and human. 

The Book of the Law, given to the nation in Josiah’s reign, proved 
to be of far-reaching significance. Itself the last and most important 
legislation of early Israel, embodying the results of a long develop- 
ment of legal praxis, it marked also the beginning of a new order in 
Hebrew life. After the overthrow of the northern kingdom and the 
dispersion of the ten tribes in remote regions of the Assyrian empire 
just a century before, only the little kingdom of Judah remained 
to carry forward the traditions and the future of Yahweh’s people. 
Lessened numbers and diminished territory made practicable the 
centralization of worship at the one altar in Jerusalem, with the at- 
tendant regulation of the popular cultus. Moreover, it became pos- 
sible to legislate for the whole nation uniformly. The code of law, 
formulated by prophets and priests, promulgated by the king, and 
addressed to all the people, was accepted by the whole nation as 
authoritative. The book was received as sacred in a new and special 
sense, which was developed intensively after the Exile by the Jewish 
community. From the motive and spirit which should animate 
justice, that Deuteronomy enjoined so passionately, Judaism passed 
to the cold meticulous observance of the literal detail of ceremonial 
law. 

323 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


- Great consequences, therefore, followed the promulgation of the 
code. The judgments rendered for the people by the priest at the 
local sanctuary or the elders in the gate were superseded by the single 
authority of a book. The freedom and flexibility of individual life 
throughout the land yielded to the rigid exactions of the written law. 
Within a century, upon the return of the exiles to Jerusalem, the 
scribe of Judaism succeeded the prophet in Israel as the people’s 
guide. 


XV 
PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


Tue elders in the gate rendering justice, the priests at the sanctuary 
declaring God’s will, alike gave counsel to the people in the weightier 
matters of their communal life. In questions of private concern 
which required solution beyond his own powers, the individual might 
resort to persons of another gift and calling. Like all peoples, Israel 
too had its wizards, soothsayers, seers, who by secret arts or special 
vision discerned things hidden from ordinary sense. So a youth 
of the hill-country of Ephraim, seeking his father’s asses strayed 
afield, repaired to a seer, who told him the asses were already found, 
and announced besides strange great happenings in store for him. 
Thus it came to pass; and the youth was chosen to be Israel’s first 
king. Years afterward, in the gathering darkness that presaged his 
tragic end, Saul inquired of a necromancer; and the wizard woman 
conjured up for him the departed spirit of the same seer who had 
foreshown the youth the honors that awaited him. 

The instance of Saul’s resort to seer and sorceress is typical of all 
the people throughout Israel’s history. The humble and the great 
sought to force the mysteries of the present and to unveil the future by 
occult agencies. Authentic representative of Yahweh was the priest. 
Custodian of the shrine, he had in his keeping the instrument of the 
sacred lot; the oracles which he thereby declared were the toroth, or 
directions, of Yahweh. Of a different order were the seer and the 
gazer. These were indeed “men of God,” but they had not the 
official status of the priest; their craft proceeded from themselves. 
The seer discovered the hidden, penetrated the remote, by his own 

325 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


inner vision; he was “a clairvoyant, a private practitioner, who by 
occult means actually saw things at a distance, whether of time 
or space.” ! The gazer took note of objects and phenomena, as 
strangely charged with portent; and he divined their import, other- 
wise obscure, but disclosed to his recondite knowledge. There were 
dreamers too, who were believed to be inspired by Yahweh. Less 
reputable but much besought were numerous and varied kinds of 
magicians, — sorcerers, charmers, wizards, necromancers, regarded 
later by Israel’s teachers as illicit. But they continued potent and 
seductive to the end. 

So deeply rooted and widespread were the practices of magic arts 
that successive codes embodied laws aimed at their suppression. 
Thus the early Book of the Covenant: ‘Thou shalt not suffer a sor- 
ceress to live” (Ex. 22 18). It is related that even King Saul put 
away the wizards and necromancers out of the land. And four cen- 
turies later the Book of the Law, promulgated in the reign of Josiah, 
ordained: “There shall not be found with thee any one that maketh 
his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one that useth divina- 
tion, one that practiseth augury, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer, or 
a charmer, or a consulter with a familiar spirit, or a wizard, or a 
necromancer.” Instead of them, ““ Yahweh thy God will raise up unto 
thee a prophet from the midst of thee, from thy brethren; unto him 
shall ye hearken.”’ 

The prophet, such as these laws had in view, an Amos, Hosea, 
Isaiah, was the supremely significant figure in the life of Israel and 
peculiarly distinctive of its genius. Other peoples had their diviners, 
seers, priests, wise men, poets, speculative thinkers. To Israel alone 
were given heroic, great-souled, deep-hearted prophets, unparalleled 
in moral earnestness, whose mission it was to affirm the sublime char- 

1 W.R. Arnold: Ephod and Ark, p. 92. 
326 


PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


acter of God and to declare his purpose with the world. Prophecy 
attained its highest reaches in the outstanding personalities of the 
eighth and seventh centuries. Though they towered above the mass, 
overshadowing priests and kings, these exemplars were themselves a 
culmination. The stirrings and strivings which they brought to full- 
est utterance and effect rose out of the beginnings of the nation. 


When the Hebrew tribes, fighting little by little to gain a foothold 
in the land, were once sore pressed by the Canaanites, then Deborah, 
the prophetess, in the name of Yahweh rallied the scattered despair- 
ing clans again to war. Divinely inspired, her fervor rekindled the 
ancient daring of the tribesmen and impelled them to victory, the 
victory of Yahweh over his enemies. 

A century later, the Israelites, defeated and broken, were with- 
drawing into their hills before the conquering Philistines. The Ark 
of God was taken, the glory was departed from Israel. Through the 
countryside roved bands of enthusiasts, whom the people knew as 
“‘prophets.”” These were quite other than the seers and the gazers, 
who plied their calling privately. The prophets, like the priests, 
were consecrated to the service of Yahweh; but their method of re- 
ceiving and declaring the divine will was altogether different from 
manipulation of the sacred lot. Garbed in flowing mantles of skin or 
goat’s-hair, with leathern girdles, and marked upon the forehead in 
sign of their devotion, stepping to the wild music of psaltery, timbrel, 
pipe, and harp, the ecstatics “prophesied” in divinely impassioned 
frenzy. Sometimes the onlookers, seized mightily by the spirit of 
Yahweh, prophesied with them. So Saul, and once three companies 
of his messengers, succumbed to the contagion. Their transports 
were extreme. Thus Saul prophesied before Samuel, and lay down 
naked all that day and all that night. The burden of their prophesy- 

327 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ing is not stated. It may be assumed, however, that they were 
champions of Yahweh, ancestral God of battles, whose worship was 
threatened by the disasters that had overtaken the tribes in the 
Philistine wars. It was as partisans of the old worship and charged 
with a religious function that they dwelt together, these “sons of the 
prophets,” in communities at a high place or sanctuary. As authen- 
tic agents of Yahweh’s communication with his people they enjoyed 
equal credence with dreams and the priestly oracle in making known 
God’s will (1 Sam. 28 6). In close relation with them was Samuel, 
seer and man of God, who had foreshown and anointed Israel’s first 
king. The activities of the prophets, therefore, seem to have been 
both religious and patriotic, rousing a renewed faith in the power of 
Yahweh, militant God of Israel. Their incitements were an expres- 
sion of the popular temper; and striking upon quick mettle, they had 
a ready response. These were crucial years in the fortunes of the 
tribes; and the influence of the prophets was doubtless considerable 
upon swift-moving events. Then they disappear from the history as 
abruptly as they emerged. Two centuries later, in the reign of Ahab, 
again at a moment of crisis for Israel, they stand forth once more to 
play an important part in the national life. Elusive figures, the early 
sons of the prophets were but obscure forerunners of greater men. 

From these enthusiasts, with their frenzied incitements, of the old 
days, up to the lofty teachers of God’s justice and love, the transition 
is not easy to trace. Divine intoxicates like the early ecstatics were 
not peculiar to Israel in its new home. An Egyptian narrative from 
about the period of Israel’s conquest of Canaan, relates how an en- 
voy, by name Wen-Amon, was sent from Egypt to Byblos, far north- 
ward in the coastland at the foot of Mt. Lebanon, to fetch cedar- 
wood. Zakar-baal, prince of the city, would not receive him, but or- 
dered him begone. But for nineteen days the envoy tarried. Then as 

328 


PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


the prince was offering sacrifice, the deity seized one of his young 
men, so that he cried, “Bring up the god; bring the messenger who 
hath charge of him.”” The phenomenon of ecstasy seems to have been 
unknown in the ancient desert. It was probably widespread in 
Phoenicia, as witness the story of Wen-Amon and the prophets of the 
Tyrian Baal at a later time; and it was extended in Canaan. The 
Hebrews may well have taken the contagion from their neighbor- 
Canaanites; and it is significant that the ecstatic prophets in Israel 
appeared in the north, rather than in the south, which was peopled 
by the tribes who came more immediately from the desert. But 
Israel turned the gift of prophesying to the service of Yahweh. The 
calling grew in dignity; and in time the name prophet, Nabi’, dis- 
placed the elder designations, seer and gazer, employed of a man of 
God. The great prophets of after centuries had something of both 
seer and enthusiast, the while they were vastly more. The transfor- 
mation of the ecstatic into the no less inspired but clear-thinking 
spokesman of a sublime God who demanded righteousness was char- 
acteristic of Israel’s genius. 


Of different fashion from the members of the guilds were imposing 
figures, divinely commissioned, who gave counsel, warning or rebuke, 
as occasion prompted, and feared not to command the king. They 
seem to appear first in the time of David; and thence they had many 
successors. They were called prophets, though they were not usually 
ecstatics; some were shrewd observers of affairs. They had the gift 
of seers, and were consulted for revelation of the future or decision 
as to a present course of action; they spoke in the name of Yahweh; 
and at times they were impassioned by moral fervor. The prophet 
Gad was also called David’s seer. A marginal note by a later hand, 
interpolated in the narrative concerning Samuel, supplies the infor- 

329 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


mation, ‘‘Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, 
thus he said, Come and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called 
a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer” (1 Sam. 9 9). Through the 
history of the kingdoms, the term prophet became more flexible and 
moreinclusive. So that in the narratives in their later form, the man 
of God of whatever order, whether seer or ecstatic or adviser, at- 
tracted to himself the name of prophet. 

The advice offered by these mentors as unqualified and decisive 
was not questioned. When David, captain of an outlaw band, had 
betaken himself to Moab, there came before him such a counsellor, 
quite without explanation in the narrative, as though comment were 
unnecessary. “And the prophet Gad said unto David, Abide not in 
the stronghold; depart, and get thee into the land of Judah. And 
David departed.”” The same prophet confronted David in the last 
years of his reign. The king had ordered a census of his people, and 
then repented his act. “ And when David rose up in the morning, the 
word of Yahweh came unto the prophet Gad, David’s seer, saying, 
Go and speak unto David, Thus saith Yahweh.’ When the pestilence 
following was stayed, Gad came that day to David, and said unto 
him, “Go up, rear an altar unto Yahweh.” And David went up ac- 
cording to the saying of Gad, as Yahweh commanded. It is evident, 
therefore, that the prophet was accepted as the authentic spokesman 
of Yahweh. 

At this epoch, likewise, other prophets stirred significantly. So 
_ King David, according to a later version of the narrative, consulted 

with Nathan as to the building of a temple to house the Ark. Im- 
mediately Nathan encouraged the project. But it came to pass the 
same night that the word of Yahweh came to Nathan—in a 
“vision” (2 Sam. 7 17) — saying, “Go tell my servant David, Thus 
saith Yahweh,”’ — to the effect that Yahweh withheld his approval. 

330 


PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


Again Nathan, sent by Yahweh, rebuked David for his sin in the 
matter of Bathsheba and her husband; and then Nathan gave the 
name to the child whom Bathsheba bore to the king. In the palace 
intrigue which overthrew David’s oldest surviving son Adonijah, 
heir presumptive to the throne, and set the son of Bathsheba in his 
place, Nathan was the dominant figure, in influence equal if not su- 
perior to Zadok the royal priest and Benaiah, commander of the 
king’s bodyguard. Of the high functionaries in David’s entourage, 
seemingly the most powerful in determining events was the prophet. 
It was a prophet, Ahijah of Shiloh, who instigated Solomon’s over- 
seer of forced labor, Jeroboam, to rebel against Rehoboam and to 
found the northern kingdom of Israel. Ahijah met the king’s officer 
in the way, and by the symbolic act of rending his cloak in twelve 
pieces, giving ten pieces to Jeroboam, the prophet announced the 
future rending of the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and the 
award of ten tribes to him. And it came to pass as Ahijah had spoken. 
To Ahijah, as once Saul resorted to Samuel the seer, came the wife of 
Jeroboam to inquire concerning the illness of her son; and she thought 
to reward him with a present of ten loaves and cakes and a cruse of 
honey. Disinterested prophet acting on behalf of Yahweh and pro- 
fessional seer were one. The Deuteronomic editors of the Book of 
Kings cite other instances. A prophet, Shemaiah, uttering the word 
of Yahweh, by his counsel to Rehoboam averted civil war between 
Judah and Israel. A generation later, Jehu son of Hanani auda- 
ciously censured the wickedness of the murderer and usurper Baasha, 
and foretold the doom of his house. In proclaiming their fateful 
message, the prophets seem not to have lacked personal courage. 
Prophets such as these, spokesmen of Yahweh and jealous for his 
sovereignty, concerned for the welfare of the state, and active to 
rebuke or to command, probably were not wanting through the 
331 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


troubled early years of the divided kingdoms, though no record of 
them has survived in the fragmentary scriptures compiled at a later 
age. The succession culminated in Elijah, greatest of them all in 
authority and power. Ahab was king of Israel. Having taken to 
wife the Sidonian princess Jezebel, he had reared in honor of her god, 
the Phoenician Baal, a temple at the capital, tended by appropriate 
priests; and a numerous company of the prophets of Baal enjoyed 
the royal patronage. Israel’s fidelity to Yahweh was threatened by 
the allurements of a sensual foreign worship. Suddenly from the 
steppes beyond Jordan appeared a prophet, austere as the desert but 
aflame with zeal, to challenge the king’s easy tolerance and to vindi- 
cate the sole majesty of Yahweh. Elijah summoned the four hundred 
fifty prophets of Baal to a trial of strength. Let them prove who is 
God, Baal or Yahweh! Their endlessly reiterated prayers, their 
frenzied leapings about the altar, their gashing of themselves with 
knives bloodily, all their prophesyings availed them nothing. Then 
Elijah called fire from heaven, which consumed the offering. And 
the assembled people fell on their faces and cried, Yahweh, he is 
God! 

Yahweh’s majesty was vindicated and Elijah justified as his true 
prophet. Now on behalf of the oppressed, as a champion of justice, 
Elijah again challenged and condemned the king. Ahab coveted 
Naboth’s vineyard, adjoining the royal palace in Jezreel, that he 
might have it for a garden of herbs. Standing on his rights, the peas- 
ant refused to bargain away his patrimony. The answer was suffi- 
cient, so far as concerned the king. But his queen, the Sidonian 
Jezebel, in respect of a mere Israelite had no regard for person or 
property. By her contrivance, with Ahab’s tacit assent, perverting 
the process of law, Naboth was put to death, and his vineyard passed 
to the king. 

332 


PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


And the word of Yahweh came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, 
Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel. . .. And thou shalt speak 
unto him, saying, Thus saith Yahweh, Hast thou killed, and also 
taken possession? And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus 
saith Yahweh, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth 
shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine. And Ahab said to Elijah, Hast 
thou found me, O mine enemy? And he answered, I have found thee. 
Behold, I will bring evil upon thee, and will utterly sweep thee 
away. ... And of Jezebel also spake Yahweh, saying, The dogs shall 
eat Jezebel by the rampart of Jezreel. ... And it came to pass, when 
Ahab heard those words, that he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth 
upon his flesh, and fasted, and lay in sackcloth, and went softly. 


Thus saith Yahweh! The word of Yahweh uttered by a prophet 
was absolute, final, crushing. And even so early in Israel, true wor- 
ship and civic justice were one. 

King Ahab had much to do with the prophets, some as seers, 
others enthusiast patriots, and a few men of sterner mould, rebuking 
wrong and announcing doom, these last as faint premonitory gleams 
forelighting greater men to come. And now appear, seemingly for 
the first time, the sycophant prophets, in attendance at the court. 
When Israel was at war with the Arameans, a prophet came near 
unto Ahab, predicting success in the battle, and advising the king in 
regard to the muster of his troops. The following year a man of God 
came near and again predicted success. Another time, a certain man 
of the sons of the prophets, wounded as though in battle and dis- 
guised by his headband drawn over his eyes to conceal the distinctive 
mark on his forehead, rebuked the king for releasing his enemy Ben- 
hadad; and when Ahab discerned that it was a prophet speaking, he 
went to his house heavy and displeased. When the war between 
Israel and the Arameans broke out anew, Jehoshaphat king of Judah 
allied himself with Ahab. 

333 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


And Jehoshaphat said unto the king of Israel, Inquire, I pray 
thee, at the word of Yahweh, to-day. Then the king of Israel 
gathered the prophets together, about four hundred men, and said 
unto them, Shall I go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I for- 
bear? And they said, Go up; for the Lord shall deliver it into the 
hand of the king. But Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here besides a 
prophet of Yahweh, that we may inquire of him? And the king of 
Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man by whom we may 
inquire of Yahweh, Micaiah the son of Imlah: but I hate him; for he 
doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And Jehoshaphat 
said, Let not the king say so. Then the king of Israel called a eunuch, 
and said, Fetch quickly Micaiah the son of Imlah. Now the king of 
Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah sat each on his throne, 
arrayed in their robes, in an open place at the entrance of the gate of 
Samaria; and all the prophets were prophesying before them. And 
Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron, and said, 
Thus saith Yahweh, With these shalt thou push the Arameans, until 
they be consumed. And all the prophets prophesied so, saying, Go up 
to Ramoth-gilead, and prosper; for Yahweh shall deliver it into the 
hand of the king. 

The messenger sent to Micaiah tried to persuade him to declare, 
like the servile smooth prophets, good unto the king. But he an- 
swered, with the proud intégrity of a true prophet, “As Yahweh 
liveth, what Yahweh saith unto me, that will I speak!” Brought 
into the royal presence, Micaiah at first repeated, ironically, the 
words of the company of prophets. When pressed for the truth, he 
announced that Yahweh had put a lying spirit in the mouth of the 
court prophets, and Yahweh had spoken evil concerning Ahab. 
Whereupon the king despatched Micaiah to prison. Ahab was slain 
in the battle; the word of Yahweh by his prophet Micaiah was 
fulfilled. 

The narrative illuminates the status, methods, and influence of the 
prophets, illustrated further by the stories attaching to Elijah and 

334 


PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


Elisha and other men of God. The prophets differed severally in 
mode; but under the comprehensive designation, nebi’im, they con- 
stituted a recognized class. Guilds of enthusiasts dwelt by sanctu- 
aries, at Beth-el, Gilgal; they were found at Jericho and in the hill 
country of Ephraim. At court were companies of prophets, depend- 
ent on the king’s bounty, who sought therefore to keep the royal 
favor by prophesying success. The guilds and the court sycophants 
comprised a numerous adherence. And individual prophets figured 
strikingly. Some were clairvoyant, were vouchsafed visions, were 
endowed with magical powers. A few spoke by direct inspiration. 
They might employ their talents on behalf of humble persons in the 
little interests of every day, rewarded for their services by gifts. Or 
they intervened decisively in affairs of state. At times, they might, 
like Zedekiah, like Isaiah and Jeremiah at a later day, reénforce their 
teaching by symbolic acts. As men of God, prophets were consulted 
regarding an enterprise of moment, for the issue was subject to the 
will of Yahweh; or they came forward of their own initiative to coun- 
sel and pronounce judgment. The prophets were fearless, devoted 
censors, or venal flatterers; they were held in awesome reverence, or 
treated with contempt; they were commanding personalities, the 
very voice of Yahweh in action, or they were mad fellows. Some 
declared truth, others prophesied falsely. All spoke in the name of 
Yahweh. Until the event proved them spurious, their utterances 
were accepted as authoritative. Familiar figures among the people, 
the prophets of the ninth century exercised a manifold influence in 
their own age. When Israel’s greatest teachers came, they too were 
hailed as prophets. But they were prophets of another character 
and range. 


The mantle of Elijah, holding a compulsion not wholly untouched 
335 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


with magic, was bestowed upon his disciple Elisha, a person of a 
quite different stamp, more in the manner of the guild enthusiast. 
Elijah, sprung from the uncompromising desert, dominated by sheer 
force of personality; and zealous champion of the true religion, he 
affirmed past dispute the exclusive claim of Yahweh upon Israel’s 
fidelity. Elisha, son of a prosperous husbandman and called from 
following the plough, was a clever man of affairs; with no message of 
moral or religious import, yet he aggrandized the repute of the pro- 
phetic order by his deeds. 

The activities of Elisha extended through four reigns. In the war 
of Israel, Judah and Edom against Moab, he was the valued adviser 
of the kings. They “went down to him.” But addressing the king of 
Israel he took, as suited the greatness of a prophet, a tone of inde- 
pendence stiffened with contempt. “As Yahweh of hosts liveth, 
before whom I stand, surely, were it not that I regard the presence 
of Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would not look toward thee, nor 
see thee. But now bring me a minstrel.” For though sure of himself 
as he was, the arrogant man of God yet relied, like the old ecstatics, 
upon outer and mechanical stimulus to induce the prophetic frenzy. 
“‘And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of 
Yahweh came upon him. And he said, Thus saith Yahweh.” 

But this instance is only a detail in Elisha’s prodigious services to 
the nation. When the Arameans were besieging Samaria, the prophet, 
against the weakness of the king himself, mightily encouraged the 
people to resistance; and his words were justified by the event. 
Another time Elisha journeyed to Damascus to anoint Hazael, in 
place of the dying monarch, to be king over the Arameans. Most 
significant for the history of Israel was the prophet’s incitement of 
the rebel Jehu to overthrow the dynasty of Omri; making himself 
king, in process of the bloody business, Jehu rooted out the official 

336 


PRECURSORS OF PROPHECY 


worship of the Phoenician Baal and restored the sovereignty of 
Yahweh: — with Elisha’s approval and active concurrence. The 
legends that gathered about Elisha as a wonder-worker, and they 
are many, do not wholly obscure his historical importance in the 
prophetic succession. 


XVI 
THE GREAT PROPHETS 


THE opening years of the eighth century, which witnessed the pass- 
ing of Elisha, brought Jeroboam to the throne of the northern king- 
dom. During his long rule there is mention in the Book of Kings of 
but one prophet, Jonah son of Amittai, who foretold the good fortune 
of the nation in the reconquest of territory. But prophets of another 
kind and greater than Jonah or his predecessors distinguished Jero- 
boam’s memorable reign. They seem to emerge abruptly, for they 
are unnoted in the historical narratives; they are suddenly and 
powerfully there. The paramount personages of their times, they are 
known to later generations by the books of public addresses that 
bear their names. 

Amos and Hosea were the first of a new order of prophet, whose 
representatives were not many, yet who were the supreme embodi- 
ment of Israel’s genius. The Judahite shepherd Amos, and Hosea, 
the high-born Israelite, prophesied in the northern kingdom shortly 
before its overthrow. They were followed in Judah by the statesman 
Isaiah and the peasant Micah. Then for more than half a century, 
while the nation went after strange gods in Manasseh’s evil reign, 
was silence, save for nameless voices, echoed perhaps in the book 
attributed to Micah, chapters 6 1 to 7 6, pronouncing the doom of 
Yahweh upon Judah and Jerusalem. In the reign of Josiah, the 
labors of Jeremiah spanned the brief teaching of Zephaniah, Na- 
hum, and Habakkuk, and continued after the downfall of the nation. 
Ezekiel, both priest and prophet, who wrote in Babylon after the 
first deportation from Jerusalem, belongs rather to Judaism than to 

338 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


Israel. The historians of the nation, themselves adherents of pro- 
phetic circles, seem strangely unaware of their great countrymen.. 
Only Isaiah appears in the Book of Kings; and Micah is cited in a 
narrative passage in the Book of Jeremiah. Of the rest, their own 
addresses, committed to writing, with addition of a few scanty bio- 
graphical notices, are the only record. In view of the greatness of 
these men and the mystery surrounding them, the conjecture is allur- 
ing that there may have been still other prophets whose names and 


discourses have not survived. 


The reign of Jeroboam was a period of prosperity such as the north- 
ern kingdom through nearly two convulsive centuries had never 
known. The borders of the land were pushed to their farthest limits. 
Peace followed. The fertile country yielded its abundance, trade 
sprang to life, and wealth came rapidly. The luxury that wealth 
makes possible flourished in abuse. A grateful folk brought lavish 
sacrifices to its gracious God. Yahweh was blessing his chosen 
favored people and the homeland. All must be well. 

The thronging revelry of a great feast-day at Beth-el, royal resi- 
dence and sanctuary, received a sudden violent check. A shepherd 
from the Judean highlands was speaking, an austere but vehement 
figure, — a prophet. Thus saith Yahweh! Seek not Beth-el.... 
Seek me, Yahweh, and ye shall live. .. . I hate, I despise your feasts, 
I will not smell in your solemn assemblies. Yea, though ye offer me 
your burnt-offerings, I will not accept them; neither will I regard the 
peace-offerings of your fat beasts....The high places of Isaac 
shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste; 
and I will rise up against the house of Jeroboam with the sword! 

Such dire words were contrary to all expectation and popular be- 
lief. It was the business of a prophet to announce good fortune, not 

339 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


disaster. No people could be more religious than the Israelites fan- 
cied themselves to be. They questioned not the power of Yahweh 
and his willingness to protect his own. The greater the outpouring 
of sacrifices, they thought, the more Yahweh was pleased; and they 
trampled his courts in multitudes to offer their holocausts. The 
words of condemnation that Amos uttered in Yahweh’s name were 
blasphemy. And of more immediate effect, his sentence of doom 
upon the king was treason. 

Amaziah, high priest of Beth-el, was concerned to stop the sedi- 
tious, impious fanatic. He sent report to the king. “Amos hath con- 
spired against thee in the midst of the house of Israel: the land is not 
able to bear all his words.’”” And to Amos, “O thou seer, go, flee thou 
away into the land of Judah, and there eat bread, and prophesy 
there.”’ Then answered Amos, “I was no prophet, neither was I one 
of the sons of the prophets; but I was a herdsman, and a dresser of 
sycomore trees: and Yahweh took me from following the flock, and 
Yahweh said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel.” 

Prophets Israel had known for centuries, but not like this angry 
stranger who smote the assembled worshippers with lashings of de- 
nunciation and of doom. The early enthusiasts had roused the tribes 
to fight the wars of Yahweh. Under the monarchy moved individual 
men of God, to whom any one might resort for enlightenment or guid- 
ance. The companies of prophets stood in varied repute; for some of 
them were venal, willing to declare falsely, if so they might gain their 
patron’s favor and reward. Such was the sneer in the high priest’s 
authoritative tone, Get thee into Judah, and there prophesy for 
your living! Which Amos indignantly threw back, I am no fortune- 
teller, no hireling prophet of your brotherhoods. 

Amos, therefore, and his fellows the great prophets, differed im- 
measurably in kind as in degree from their predecessors. Yet they 

340 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


were linked with the past, for they availed themselves of the prophetic 
office, established from of old and worthily exercised in many gen- 
erations according to need. Quite naturally they recognized the 
legitimate line of Yahweh’s spokesmen, of which they were the con- 
summate exemplars. So Amos: “I raised up of your sons for proph- 
ets.’ And Hosea: “I have also spoken unto the prophets.” And 
Jeremiah: “Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the 
land of Egypt unto this day, I have sent unto you all my servants 
the prophets.” Between Elijah and Elisha, men of action, and the 
fervid terrific preachers of the two centuries following, there is a 
continuity, though in the fragmentary historical records the transi- 
tion is lost. The great prophets turned to their own uses all that their 
forerunners had won. Employing the prophetic technique and 
taking advantage of the popular readiness to hear the word of Yah- 
weh, they found the way prepared for them. Then with wider out- 
look, with deeper insight and higher spiritual vision, they proclaimed 
truths new to their own world and valid eternally. 

Moreover these men differed from their predecessors in the pur- 
pose and the method of their revelation. The popular seers and the 
professional prophets, in the service of an individual, answered a 
specific question, usually in a favorable sense. For access to the 
secret of the issue, they depended upon physical means, as the ob- 
servation of signs or ecstasy induced by music. The divine intention 
or probable event thus made known to them referred to a single in- 
stance. The great prophets on the contrary spoke from their imme- 
diate knowledge of God. Often they had‘a “vision,’”’ mystical per- 
haps but not occult, the symbolism of which they adapted to the 
practical interpretation of the fundamental facts of religion and 
human life. Impassioned, they were not ecstatics; possessed by the 
spirit of Yahweh, they were yet masters of reason. Working from 

341 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


general truths, won not by supernatural foresight but by intuition, 
reflection, experience, they rested their case on logic and necessity; 
given certain conditions, certain consequences must result. Their 
thinking was not abstract, but immediately practical; their doctrine 
was not systematic, but stated always in relation to a concrete fact. 
Though addressed to an occasion, their teaching, based on absolute 
principles, was capable of universal extension. The true prophets, 
proclaiming to the whole people the nature of Yahweh and his de- 
mands in terms of conduct, were the embodied active conscience of 
the nation. 


Called from his flock in the highlands of Judah, Amos was bidden 
by Yahweh to go and prophesy to the people of the northern king- 
dom. In his lonely watches on the barren hills, under the great sky 
of morning and evening and the frosty stars, the shepherd had seen 
visions. Some were but facts in nature, seen and pondered. Locusts 
that consumed the late herbage; a drought that devoured the springs 
under the earth and would have eaten up the land: these calamities 
were the work of Yahweh, who doeth all; but they were not irre- 
mediable. “It shall not be, saith Yahweh.” The Lord also showed 
him, — perhaps a glimpse caught in a market-place and turned to 
symbolic account by his quick imagination, — a basket of summer 
fruit (qayits), ripe and gathered as the year neared its end; then said 
Yahweh, “The end (gets) is come upon my people Israel.’’ Again the 
Lord appeared to him, — as he had seen a builder, or it might have 
been a waking dream of meditation, — standing beside a wall, hold- 
ing a plumbline in his hand. Then said the Lord, “Behold, I will 
set a plumbline in the midst of my people Israel; I will not again pass 
by them any more.” 

Yahweh is an exact workman, a God of perfect justice. He may 

342 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


forgive and stay his hand once, twice; but at the last he requires the 
penalty inexorably. Tested by the divine plumbline of righteous- 
ness, Israel is hopelessly out of true, and shall be swept away. 

Amos was an observer and a thinker. Though humbly reared in 
the solitudes of the Judean wastes, he was versed in the history of his 
people; he showed besides a familiarity with conditions in northern 
Israel, and a wide knowledge of other nations, from Egypt and Ethi- 
opia to the Arameans of Damascus; beyond, he discerned, unnamed, 
the coming of the Assyrians. A prophet impelled to his mission by 
the spirit of Yahweh, yet he applied a relentless logic. Measuring 
actuality as he saw it in Israel by the standard of Yahweh’s abso- 
lute righteousness, he announced the judgments that must follow of 
necessity. 

The sins of the nation are many and heinous, especially of the 
dominant class, the powerful officials and the rich. Men think them- 
selves religious, yet even at the very altar they lie down on the clothes 
extorted from a debtor, and in the house of their God they drink the 
wine that has been exacted as a fine. Debtors are sold into slavery 
for a trifling default. Unchastity is general. Luxury, so contrary to 
the temper of the old days, is gained by oppression. The women are 
equally iniquitous; they crush the needy, and they bid their husbands 
to cater to their debauchery. Judges are corrupt, merchants are dis- 
honest. Everywhere greed, robbery, violence, at the cost of the poor. 

The guilt of the nation remains guilt, though the sinners them- 
selves are ignorant of their offending. “ Are we not seeking Yahweh?”’ 
Yes, you consult oracles for your own private selfish wicked ends. 
But seek ye Yahweh in a higher and spiritual sense. “Seek good, 
and not evil, that ye may live: and so! Yahweh, the God of hosts, 
shall be with you, as ye say!”” Men fondly think to make their peace 
with God by the excessive zeal of their religiousness. With caustic 

343 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


irony Amos shrivels their pretence and folly. ‘Come to Beth-el, 
and — transgress! to Gilgal, and — multiply transgression!” They 
cannot atone for their guilt by whatever lavishness of sacrifice. 
Yahweh despises their clamorous feasts, he will not accept their 
profuse offerings. Instead of oblation he requires justice; he demands 
not ritual but righteousness. 

Amos applies his absolute standard of Yahweh’s righteousness 
in its farthest consequences. No longer pardon but punishment is 
Israel’s portion, for the people have not met the test. “I will not 
again pass by them any more.” At last God’s perfect justice exacts the 
merited penalty. Very gracious had Yahweh been to his people in 
the past: he brought them up out of Egypt and led them forty years 
in the wilderness to possess the land of the Amorite, whom he de- 
stroyed before them. He gave them prophets, to teach them his 
ways. But they silenced the prophets, they would not heed. And now 
they hate reproof and abhor him that speaks uprightly; he that is 
prudent must keep silence: for it is an evil time. Rejecting Yah- 
weh’s loving-kindness, the people have made his discipline also of 
no effect. Though he visited them with calamities, with famine, 
drought, blight, pestilence, disastrous wars, and the destruction 
of their cities, yet they returned not unto Yahweh. But now the 
greater Israel’s privilege and opportunity, the greater shall be the 
punishment. The prophet’s irresistible logic culminates in the over- 
whelming terrible sentence: “ You only have I known of all the fam- 
ilies of the earth; therefore I will visit upon you all your iniquities.” 

The several addresses contained in the Book of Amos were evi- 
dently delivered on different occasions, for the prophet brings his 
indictment against the people in varying forms. So too he threatens 
them with divers punishments. To chastise Israel for its transgres- 
sions, Yahweh will destroy the altars of Beth-el, and smite the proud 

344 


THE GREAT PROPHETS ~ 


houses filled with the spoils of violence and robbery. With scathing 
mockery the Tekoan herdsman confronts the haughty notables of 
Israel, “As the shepherd rescueth out of the mouth of the lion two 
legs or the piece of an ear — as Amos well knows by experience — 
so shall the children of Israel be rescued that sit in Samaria in the 
corner of a couch, and on the silken cushions of a bed.”’ The land 
shall be ravaged and the nation go into captivity beyond Damascus. 
Have the people trusted in Yahweh? Blindly. The sanctuaries of 
Israel shall be laid waste. 

I will turn your feasts into mourning, 

And all your songs into lamentation; 

And I will bring sackcloth upon all loins, 

And baldness upon every head; 

And I will make it as the mourning for an only son,’ 

And the end thereof as a bitter day. 

Master of a noble and trenchant style, Amos commands the re- 
sources of an accomplished rhetorician. His power of close reasoning 
enables him to frame an irrefutable argument. Yahweh, the all- 
righteous God, must punish all unrighteousness; Israel is unright- 
eous: therefore Yahweh will punish Israel. The syllogism is unas- 
sailable. No apparent merits of worship and sacrifice can prevail 
against Israel’s essential sins of injustice to avert the inevitable pen- 
alty. In the address that opens his book, Amos manceuvres his audi- 
tors into a position that well suits his purpose. Yahweh will punish 
other nations — all of them at one time or another enemies of 
Israel — for their wickedness; and his hearers acquiesce delightedly. 
With precisely the same formula, before they are aware of the con- 
sequences of the agreement which they accord the speaker as he pro- 
ceeds, “Thus saith Yahweh, For three transgressions of Israel, yea 
for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof.” There is no 


escape from the conclusion; the people stand condemned of them- 
345 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


selves. Often the prophet may force his auditors to convict them- 
selves by a sudden adroit shift from a commonplace, which they 
readily acknowledge, to its reverse. “Behold, the days come, saith 
the Lord Yahweh, that I will send a famine in the land.” Yes, that 
may well be, say the people. Bul, continues the prophet, “not a 
famine of bread, nor a thirst of water, but of hearing the words of 
Yahweh.” And again, “Woe unto you that desire the day of Yah- 
weh! — a day of triumph — Wherefore would ye have the day of 
Yahweh? It is darkness, and not light.”” With mordant humor the 
speaker adds, “As if a man did flee from a lion, and a bear met him; 
or went into the house and leaned his hand on the wall, and a serpent 
bit him.” Amos uses the rhetorical question with immense effect, 
compelling his hearers to the answer he wishes to bring home to them, 
and leaving them to infer the necessary consequences. “Did ye 
bring unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O 
house of Israel?” No:— and therefore they are not the primary 
requirement of religion. This developed form of oratory presupposes 
on the part of the audience a quick intelligence, which Israel pos- 
sessed. The style of Amos is distinguished by its concreteness, the 
vivid image instead of an abstract general principle. 


Shall horses run upon the rock? 

Will one plough there with oxen? 

That ye have turned justice into gall, 

And the fruit of righteousness into wormwood. 


Dramatically he pronounces upon the nation a dirge, cast in the gina 
rhythm, the technical form of the lamentation. 


Fallen no more to rise, 
Virgin of Israel; 

Hurled upon her land, 
None to raise her! 


346 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


In his fiery earnestness to convince Israel of its sins, the prophet 
takes the tone less of pleading than of invective and scorn. 


Hear this word, ye kine of Bashan, 

That are in the mountain of Samaria ” 

Which oppress the poor, 

Which crush the needy, 

Which say unto their lords, 

Bring, and let us drink. 

The Lord Yahweh hath sworn by his holiness, 

Lo, the days shall come upon you, 

That they shall take you away with hooks, 

And your residue with fish-hooks. 
Endowed with the richest literary gifts, Amos is yet an uncompro- 
mising realist, without sentiment; sternly ethical, he is less a poet 


than a preacher. 


A contemporary of Amos, though presumably younger, Hosea, 
born an Israelite, addressed his own people of the northern kingdom. 
Deeply learned in the national history, he showed also an intimate 
acquaintance with present affairs, as of one actively concerned in 
them. The call to prophesy came to Hosea not in a vision but as an 
actual experience. His wife, whom he loved ardently, proved un- 
faithful; the children she bore were not his own. In the sequel it 
becomes evident that Hosea parted from his wife, and that she fell 
into extreme degradation; for the narrative continues that he was 
impelled to buy her back at the price of a slave, though she was to be 
cut off from all intercourse, even with her husband. 

In his own personal experience the prophet saw the symbol of Yah- 
weh’s experience with Israel. The people of Yahweh’s choice, as it 
were his spouse, whom he loved ardently, had gone a-whoring after 
other gods. In their infatuation they supposed it was the baals who 
had given them their hire, — their bread and their water, their wool 

347 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


and their flax, their oil and their drink. Not so. Yahweh is Israel’s 
true husband; and for punishment of her infidelity, he will withhold 
the bounty that is Yahweh’s only. He will also cause all her mirth 
to cease, her feasts, her new moons and her sabbaths, and all her 
solemn assemblies. As the redeemed wife of the prophet must yet 
live in separation, so Israel “shall abide many days without king, 
and without prince, and without sacrifice, and without pillar, and 
without ephod or teraphim,’’ — bereft of the very foundations of its 
political and religious life. 

This first prophecy fell in the still prosperous years of King Jero- 
boam. Here the popular false worship, which Amos had condemned 
as misdirected zeal, Hosea attacks as outright apostasy. It is positive 
unfaithfulness to Yahweh. In succeeding addresses the prophet re- 
turns again and again to this theme, with which is interwoven his 
vehement yet wistful censure of other abuses that resulted from 
Israel’s primary infidelity. 

Within little more than twenty years after the death of Jeroboam, 
the northern kingdom was swept to its violent end. Six kings, four 
of them assassins and usurpers, mounted the precarious throne. 
Anarchy or at best misrule, a fickle and futile reliance upon blunder- 
ing diplomacy, perfidious priests and teachers who taught falsely, 
utter rottenness throughout the mass, called desperately for the 
rebuke of a prophet and the chastisement of God. 

As a patriot who sees his nation plunging to ruin, as a sensitive 
illumined spirit wounded to the innermost, Hosea cries out to his 
erring countrymen their need of knowledge and repentance. His 
addresses, as befitted the chaos of the times, and the conflict of 
emotion in his own nature, are impulsive, abrupt, incoherent; lacking 
structure and logical progress, his book is less an argument than 
a solicitous appeal, the more persuasive that pleading triumphs 

348 





THE GREAT PROPHETS 


over denunciation; the prophet’s tenderness is greater than his 
wrath. 

The burden of Hosea’s teaching is uttered in the entreaty, “O 
Israel, return unto Yahweh thy God, for thou hast fallen by thine 
iniquity!’” Yahweh is a God of love. From the beginning, the na- 
tion’s history is the witness to his gracious kindness. ‘When Israel 
was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. I 
taught Ephraim to walk; but they knew not that I healed them.” 
Because Yahweh has chosen them for his own, he requires their loyal 
love and obedience in return. But bent on backsliding, they trans- 
gress the covenant. The all-inclusive sin, therefore, is infidelity. 
True to the sustained metaphor of the relation between Yahweh and 
Israel as a marriage, Hosea denominates this infidelity as whoredom; 
and indeed unchastity, both literal and figurative, bulks large in the 
prophet’s indictment. Faithlessness prevails in religion, in politics, in 
conduct. There is no truth nor goodness nor knowledge of God. This 
charge the prophet reiterates in his several discourses with a wealth 
of specific detail. 

God’s chastisements must certainly follow. The land shall mourn, 
and every one that dwelleth therein shall languish. Samaria shall be- 
come desolate. The Assyrian shall be their king. “My God will cast 
them away, because they did not hearken unto him; and they shall 
be wanderers among the nations.” 

It is characteristic of Hosea that the prophet’s anger and reproach 
yield to grief and pity. However scathing his denunciation of Is- 
rael’s manifold iniquities, he recognizes that his countrymen have 
fallen into sin because they do not rightly know Yahweh. “My 
people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.’”’ How many times he 
would bring home to misguided foolish Ephraim the saving truth, 
“T desire goodness and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more 

349 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


than burnt offerings.’”’ With infinite pathos Yahweh beseeches his 
wayward son: “O Ephraim, what shall I do unto thee? When I 
would heal Israel, then is the iniquity of Ephraim uncovered... . 
Though I have taught and strengthened their arms, yet do they 
devise mischief against me.” So closely is the prophet himself identi- 
fied with God’s message that he is transported by yearning and 
despair. “The prophet is a fool, the man that hath the spirit is mad, 
for the abundance of thine iniquity.”” He is overwhelmed by the 
hindrances cast about his mission by the people’s obduracy. “As 
for the prophet, a fowler’s snare is in all his ways, and enmity in the 
house of his God.” But Yahweh’s love is patient and persistent, 
though Israel seems hopelessly estranged. With anguished pleading 
irresistible in tender compulsion, Yahweh cries, 


How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? 

How shall I cast thee off, Israel? 

My heart is turned within me, 

My compassions are kindled together. 

I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, 
I will not return to destroy Ephraim: 

For I am God, and not man; 

The Holy One in the midst of thee; 

And I will not come in wrath. 

Nor does the prophet leave his people without constructive counsel. 
“*Sow to yourselves in righteousness, reap according to mercy. Turn 
thou to thy God; keep mercy and justice; and wait on thy God con- 
tinually.” 

The discourses of Hosea reveal intimately this prophet’s temper, 
in many ways so typically Israelite. He is acutely sensitive, quick 
and variable, and yet tenacious. He is swayed by conflicting emo- 
tions, immediately in contrast to each other: gentleness alternates 
with severity; bitter scorn is succeeded by entreaty. Dominated by 
his feelings, his mind grasps principles in terms of things, actual, 

350 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


warm, vibrant. Thus the prevailing obscurity of his turbulent style 
is lighted by vivid homely metaphors. “Ephraim is a cake not 
turned.” “A silly dove, without understanding, —I will spread 
my net upon them.” “They sow the wind, and they shall reap the 
whirlwind.” “They shall be as the morning cloud, and as the dew 
that passeth early away, as the chaff that is driven with the whirl- 
wind, and as the smoke out of a chimney.” His whole teaching is 
urgently personal. Out of his own private experience he came to see 
that God’s relation to Israel is a vitally personal relation; and to 
complete the circle, he figures the nation as a person, an individual. 
Mobile as is his imagination, he is yet steadfast and tireless of pur- 
pose. Against ignorance, folly, and wilful sin, in spite of active 
enmity, he holds to his course, though not without flinching. As 
with many another of his race, his passionate conviction of God 
triumphs over all obstacles. His career brilliantly exemplifies the 
prophetic mission. 

From the complexity of Hosea’s book, a difficult and injured text, 
his allusiveness, his recondite historical references, there emerge a 
few clear themes of his doctrine. They show him, whatever his ardor 
for right conduct, to have been a teacher of religion in its ultimate 
reality. Whereas Amos is intellectual in his understanding of the 
divine nature, Hosea has immediate experience of a personal God. 
The relationship between God and man is not physical and mechan- 
ical, as other nations conceived it and as the majority in Israel be- 
lieved, but both moral and spiritual, demanding not only right con- 
duct but a right heart. The truths apprehended by Hosea pointed 
the way to the highest reaches of Israel’s religion. 


Some ten years after Hosea’s voice fell silent, the northern king- 
dom was overthrown. The future of the Hebrew nation passed to 
dol 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the sole keeping of Judah. Here, as in Israel, spokesmen of Yahweh 
were denouncing the people’s sins and proclaiming doom. For nearly 
forty years, until the Assyrians mysteriously withdrew from the 
siege of Jerusalem in 701, Isaiah was the dominant figure in the 
capital, indeed the most accomplished, versatile, powerful, and pro- 
found of all the prophets. Within this period, probably in the last 
decade, during the reign of Hezekiah, another prophet, not of the 
city but of the Judean lowland, uttered his brief crashing oracles.! 
Micah was a villager of the region bordering on Philistine terri- 

tory, along the secular pathway of invading armies. Aware of the 
menace of Assyria’s onward march, he was yet more pointedly con- 
scious of the perils that threatened Judah from within. All about 
him he saw evidences of the misery which the oppressive greed of his 
nation’s rulers brought upon the humble. It lay in the power of their 
hand to seize fields and houses, and thus to deprive the small land- 
owner of his dearest possession, his little plot of ground, heritage of 
his fathers. The tenacity of Naboth was representative of his like in 
all generations. In thus amassing great estates to provide them- 
selves the means for their dissolute extravagance at the capital, these 
absentee landlords cared not that they cast out toiling women from 
their houses, which to them were pleasant, and bereaved young 
children of their home. So shameless was their ravening, they 
stripped the very garments from unoffending peasants. The proph- 
et’s invective rises to a cry of delirious ferocity. : 

Hear, I pray you, ye heads of Jacob, 

And rulers of the house of Israel: 

Is it not for you to know justice? 


Ye who hate the good, and love the evil; 
Who eat the flesh of my people, 


1 Only the first three chapters of his book, not including 1 7 and 2 12, 13, are gen- 
uinely of Mic 7 


352 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


And flay their skin from off them, ‘ 
And break their bones, and chop them in pieces. 

In general, the crimes that Micah charges against the rulers were 
the prevailing flagrant iniquities of the time, similarly condemned by 
his predecessors in Israel and by his great contemporary in Judah; 
and he is at one with them in his threatenings of ruin, desolation, and 
captivity. Especially however, this villager, champion of his fellow 
yeomen, execrates the wickedness of cities. With the conservatism 
of his kind, which looked back to the good old days when the Israel- 
ites were a shepherd and farmer folk, and riches had not cursed men’s 
lives, he regards the great cities as wholly evil. 


What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? 
And what is the sin of Judah? is it not Jerusalem? 

They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity. Be- 
cause of the sins of the nobles, “Zion shall be ploughed as a field,”” — 
here speaks the peasant — “‘and Jerusalem shall become heaps.” 
Announcing the word of Yahweh, the prophet yet remains faithful 

to his own circumstances and point of view. 
The Book of Micah affords a glimpse of the popular reaction to 
prophetic censure. The guilty auditors, to stifle their own conscience, 
try to silence the speaker. “Drivel not,” they say, “let none talk of 
these things. Is the spirit of Yahweh impatient? Do not his words 
do good to him that walketh uprightly>”’ — as they would like to 
persuade themselves and others that they are doing. They try to 
evade the prophet’s condemnation by convincing themselves that it 
does not apply. But Micah answers them. The heads of Jerusalem 
judge for reward, the priests teach for hire, the prophets divine for 
money. “ Yet they lean upon Yahweh, and say, Is not Yahweh in the 
midst of us? No evil shall come upon us.” Even if they are honest in 
their belief that they have Yahweh’s favor, assuredly they are blind 

300 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL, 


to God’s true character. The prophet had to fight both hypocrisy 
and ignorance. It must have seemed ever a losing battle. 

The oracles of Micah are significant notably as they illuminate 
the nature of Hebrew prophecy in its several aspects. Micah him- 
self had something of the traditional frenzy of the guild. Trans- 
ported by the horror of impending ruin, he cries out, 


For this will I wail and howl; 

I will go stripped and naked; 

I will make a wailing like the jackals, 

And a lamentation like the ostriches. 
But he distinguishes sharply between his own mission and the busi- 
ness of the popular nationalist prophets. “Thus saith Yahweh con- 
cerning the prophets that make my people to err; that bite with their 
teeth, and cry, Peace; and whoso putteth not into their mouths, they 
even sanctify war against him.” When they are fed, they announce 
smooth things; but if they fail of their hire, they declare a holy war 
on their employers. With a sarcasm the more biting because the 
allegation is true, Micah exposes their perversity: “If a man walking 
in a spirit of falsehood do lie, saying, I will prophesy unto thee of 
wine and of strong drink; he shall even be the prophet of this people.” 
With terrible plainness Micah proclaims a doom upon false prophets 
and all the mantic tribe, a veritable twilight of the idols: 


Therefore it shall be night unto you, that ye shall have no vision; 
And it shall be dark unto you, that ye shall not divine; 

And the sun shall go down upon the prophets, 

And the day shall be black over them. 

And the seers shall be put to shame, 

And the diviners confounded; 

Yea, they shall all cover their lips; 

For there is no answer of God. 


With equal directness, yet in words fraught with immense meaning, 
Micah adds, 
394 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


But I, I am full of power by the spirit of Yahweh, 
And of judgment, and of might, 

To declare unto Jacob his transgression, 

And to Israel his sin. 


A consummate statement of the true prophet’s character and call- 
ing. 


In the last four decades of the eighth century, events crowded 
tumultuously upon the two Hebrew kingdoms. After a long and 
prosperous reign parallel with the rule of Jeroboam II in Israel, 
King Uzziah of Judah died about the year 740. Some five years later 
his successor Jotham was followed on the throne by his son Ahaz, a 
weak-willed youth, controlled by the harem. Soon after his accession, 
the usurper Pekah of Israel and Rezin of Damascus attacked Judah. 
In panic, Ahaz purchased the help of Assyria; and the confederates 
were thrown back from Jerusalem. Damascus fell before the Assy- 
rians in 732, and Samaria ten years later. In 727 Hezekiah mounted 
the throne of Judah. The Assyrians, skirting the Judean borders, 
defeated the Egyptians and Philistines at Raphia in 719; and again, 
in 711, when they had conquered the Philistines, they threatened 
the little highland kingdom. Finally the Assyrians in 701 laid siege 
to Jerusalem; then strangely and as though suddenly in a night, the 
invading army withdrew. 

Throughout this period of forty years, a time of instant menace 
of disaster, a web of conspiracy, intrigue, and counterplot, Judah 
playing Egypt and the Philistine cities against the irresistible might 
of Assyria, flashes of hope lighting for a moment the thick-gathering 
clouds of despair, Jerusalem was counselled, scourged, emboldened, 
and inspirited by the flaming presence and mordant words of a 
prophet, by name Isaiah, — “ Yahweh is salvation.” 

The year that King Uzziah died, a young aristocrat of Jerusalem 

355 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


had a vision. Within the Temple, close by the altar, he saw the Lord 
sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; above, the seraphim, winged 
beings of consuming fire, sang one to another antiphonally, 

Holy, holy, holy, is Yahweh of hosts; 

The whole earth is full of his glory. 
Appalled by the sight of radiant holiness incarnate in humanly vis- 
ible image, the youth cried out in awed dismay, “Woe is me! for I 
am undone; because [ am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the 
midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, 
Yahweh of hosts.” Then flew one of the seraphim to him, bearing a 
glowing stone taken with tongs from off the altar, and touched his 
mouth with it. “Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is 
taken away, and thy sin forgiven.” The voice of the Lord said, 
“Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”’ The youth answered, 
**Here am I; send me.” 

Isaiah’s earliest oracles to the citizens of Jerusalem on more than 
one occasion (2 5-4 1, 5, 9 8-10 4), like the words of the prophets in 
Israel, bore only condemnation, applying primarily to Judah, but so 
wide was the prophet’s cognizance, indicting the northern kingdom 
also. To the censure of social iniquities practised by the dominant 
class and the demoralizing luxury of the rich, both men and women, 
the young reformer added a charge not only against the worship of 
idols, but also against the resort to divination and enchantments in 
place of belief and trust in God. And he proclaimed the inevitable 
day of Yahweh’s judgment with varied penalties. 

Such was the tenor of Isaiah’s prophecy from the beginning to the 
end of his labors. But he offered constructive teaching as well, prom- 
ises of hope, — though only for the future and contingent upon re- 
pentance. The ruin that Yahweh is bringing upon his people will be 
mitigated by the salvation of the righteous, so few indeed as to con- 

396 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


stitute but aremnant. Yahweh must needs destroy, in the cleansing 
of the nation. 


I will turn my hand upon thee, 
And thoroughly purge away thy dross, 
And will take away all thine alloy. 


Then shall dawn another day. 


I will restore thy judges as at the first, 

And thy counsellors as at the beginning: 

Afterward thou shalt be called The city of righteousness, 

A faithful town. 

Zion shall be redeemed with justice, 

And they that return of her with righteousness. 
In that day it shall come to pass that ‘‘a remnant shall return, even 
the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.” Throughout long, 
disheartening years, while conditions and occasions seemed to call 
only for condemnation, Isaiah was sustained by his positive faith. 
At the ultimate moment of extreme crisis, when the Assyrians were 
moving upon Jerusalem, the prophet sent this word to the frightened 
king: “The remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again 
take root downward, and bear fruit upward. For out of Jerusalem 
shall go forth a remnant, and out of mount Zion they that shall 
escape: the zeal of Yahweh of hosts will perform this.” 

This ultimate moment, also, was the vindication of another doc- 
trine of Isaiah, the inviolability of Jerusalem. Though Yahweh was 
indeed, as Amos had already taught, a God who extended his rule 
over other nations, yet the fate of his worship as peculiarly the God of 
Israel was bound up with the survival of his people in their own land, 
whose dearest soil and crowning glory was Jerusalem, David’s city. 
Yahweh was supreme, not only in holiness and justice, but in majesty 
and power. Though he destroy, yet would he also save. “Behold, I 


lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner- 
397 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


stone of sure foundation.” “As birds hovering, so will Yahweh of 
hosts protect Jerusalem; he will protect and deliver it, he will pass 
over and preserve it.” 

Linked with the theme of a righteous remnant dwelling in the 
redeemed city is Isaiah’s conception of the ideal king. In contrast to 
the present inept rulers of a wicked and perverse people, God will 
raise up a prince who shall reign gloriously. 


Unto us a child is born, 

Unto us a son is given; 

And the government shall be upon his shoulder: 

And his name shall be called 

Wonderful counsellor, Mighty God, 

Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 
Other passages of similar import in the Book of Isaiah, if not by 
Isaiah himself, were inspired by his teaching. The idea was very 
precious to the faithful. The expectation of the coming of Yahweh’s 
“Anointed,” the Messiah, allured and sustained the Jews in their 
darkest hours of adversity and humiliation, — the fulfilment of 
their highest worldly aspirations. 

A rigorous censor of his people’s sins, with whatever threat of 
imminent doom or promise of consolation, Isaiah was not a sudden 
apparition nor lonely voice. The prophet intervened actively in the 
troubled politics of his time, as both critic and mentor, but always as 
the spokesman of Yahweh. He rested his judgment, not on the prac- 
tical expediency of the moment, but on the eternal principles of 
righteousness. His understanding of Yahweh’s nature, his faith in 
the power of God to execute the divine purpose, enabled him with 
surest wisdom to counsel the rulers of Judah at the most critical 
junctures. When Pekah of Israel and Rezin of Damascus laid siege 
to Jerusalem, King Ahaz and his people were stricken with panic 
fear. The prophet confronted the king: Be quiet; fear not, neither let 

308 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


thy heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands. 
It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. But have faith in 
God. For if ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. 
Yahweh of hosts, him shall ye sanctify; and let him be your fear and 
your dread. And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that 
have familiar spirits and unto the wizards, that chirp and mutter: 
should not a people seek unto their God? Isaiah announces the com- 
ing of the waters of the River, the Assyrians in their might, to lay 
waste the lands pertaining to Damascus and Samaria; and knowing 
the craven unbelief of Ahaz and his people, he declares the flood 
shall sweep onward into Judah, and overflow and pass through with 
destruction. Thus Yahweh spoke to his prophet with a strong 
hand. 

It came to pass as Isaiah had said. Damascus and Samaria were 
overthrown. Judah, however, purchased a temporary respite at the 
price of vassalage to Assyria. As tense years went by, the subject 
kingdom grew restive under the yoke; the rulers began intriguing with 
neighbor states and with Egypt. Again the prophet intervened with 
trenchant counsel. To Ahaz he had recommended a policy of in- 
action, trusting in the might of Yahweh to protect his people ac- 
cording to his own high purposes. The practical corollary of this 
advice was the avoidance of all foreign entanglements. Now that 
Judah was actually tributary to Assyria, he urged a quiet confident 
faith in God. Now, more explicitly than at the first, he condemned 
repeatedly with cumulative scorn the resort to Egypt as an ally in 
the revolt, and equally the reliance upon any material means. In 
vain did they look to their armor, and repair the breaches in the wall, 
and provide for their water supply. “But ye looked not unto him 
that hath done this, neither had ye respect unto him that purposed it 
long ago.” In vain was the coming of emissaries from Philistia, 

359 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Babylon, Egypt, who sought alliance at the Judahite capital. “What 
then shall one answer the messengers of the nation? That Yahweh 
hath founded Zion, and in her — not in foreign principalities — 
shall the afflicted of his people take refuge.’ As for Egypt, the 
prophet, with the shrewd appraisal of a keen observer close to affairs 
of state, estimated the big and braggart empire of the south at its 
true worth. But informed though he was concerning actual condi- 
tions, he applied in judgment of the concrete practical situation the 
ultimate test of Yahweh’s sovereign approval. 

Woe to the rebellious children, — saith Yahweh — 

That take counsel, but not of me, 

And that make a league, but not of my spirit, 

That they may add sin to sin; 

That set out to go down into Egypt, 

And have not asked at my mouth; 

To strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, 

And to trust in the shadow of Egypt! 

Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame, 

And the trust in the shadow of Egypt your confusion. 
“Egypt helpeth in vain and to no purpose: therefore have I called 
her Rahab — the Blusterer — that sitteth still.’ It is Yahweh 
of hosts who will protect Jerusalem and deliver it. And so it 
proved. 

In his survey of the shifting intricate present and the swiftly omi- 
nous future, Isaiah saw clearly from the first that the resistless 
march of Assyria must finally overwhelm Judah. In view of such a 
disaster, as incredible to the devout if misguided worshippers of Yah- 
weh as the prophet saw it to be inevitable, it was necessary to vindi- 
cate Yahweh’s omnipotence. Therefore Isaiah declared that the 
disaster overtaking the people was the merited punishment which 
God would visit upon them for their sins, and that the Assyrian, 
whatever his own persuasion of his invincible might, was but the 

360 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


instrument of Yahweh’s purpose. “Ho Assyrian, the rod of mine 
anger, the staff in whose hand is mine indignation!”” The prophet 
was enabled to forecast the coming of the conqueror by his acumen; 
his dialectic, sharpened by quick insight, served to reconcile the 
seeming contrast between the sovereign rule of Yahweh and the ruin 
of his people. But to foresee that the tidal power of the invader 
would be flung back at the very gates of Jerusalem exceeded the scope 
of ordinary reckoning. To affirm the discomfiture of the enemy with 
the same assurance that Isaiah had certified his approach, was an 
act of supreme faith, supremely justified by the event. 

From the welter of the times, from the aggregate of weak-willed or 
faint-hearted kings, intriguing officials, and inconstant populace, 
Isaiah emerges as the one commanding personality in Jerusalem, 
urgent, resolute, indomitable. Idealist though he was, the politicians 
of Judah were afraid of him. They felt his influence against their 
devious schemes to be so powerful that they attempted to conceal 
their manceuvres, hoping to outwit by accomplished facts an op- 
ponent whose only weapon was the word. Isaiah, more than a match 
for them, exposed their futility by a stinging rebuke. 

Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from Yahweh, 
And whose works are in the dark, 
And that say, Who seeth us? 


And who knoweth us? 
Ye turn things upside down! 


Even their ridicule was of no avail to disarm the prophet, for 
adroitly and with piercing irony he turned their own blade against 
the scoffers themselves. They said mockingly, 


Whom will he teach knowledge? 

And whom will he make to understand the message? 
Them that are weaned from the milk, 

And drawn from the breasts? 


361 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 
And they add in childish lisping syllables, 


ki tsav latsav tsav latsav 
qav laqav qav laqav 

zer sham 

zer sham 


which is interpreted, 

For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept; 

Line upon line, line upon line; 

Here a little, 

There a little. 
With the same mockery but to more terrible effect, Isaiah comes 
back at them: “Nay, but by men of strange lips and with another 
tongue will he speak to this people; to whom he said, This is the rest, 
give ye rest to him that is weary: yet they would not hear. Therefore 
shall the word of Yahweh be unto them ‘precept upon precept, pre- 
cept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, there a 
little’ ; that they may go, and fall backward, and be broken, and 
snared, and taken!” 

The scoffers “that rule this people that is in Jerusalem” had 
reason to fear Isaiah. . Though indeed his only weapon was the word, 
he was immensely resourceful in the wielding of it. His own name, 
“Yahweh is salvation,” he regarded as significant; and he gave sym- 
bolic names to his two sons, “A remnant shall return’’ and “Spoil 
speedeth, prey hasteth.”’ At his deft command stood a richly stored 
armory of gleaming image and piquant phrase (10 12-19, 17 12-14, 
18, 30 14, and many another). Profoundly serious of purpose as he 
was, he yet had an extraordinary sense of the dramatic, the aston- 
ishing, the vivid and concrete. On a great tablet, in common script 
that all might read, he wrote the warning phrase which he afterward 
bestowed as a name upon his younger son. Similarly, the epigram 
with which he characterized the blustering inaction of Egypt he 

362 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


wrote before the people and inscribed it in a book. For three years he 
went about the streets of Jerusalem barefoot and stripped like a 
captive, to betoken the fate impending upon Egypt at the hand of 
Assyria; and how should Judah escape? Because Isaiah returned so 
insistently with such varied resources to the attack, it might seem 
that his words and acts were of no effect. But though he was op- 
posed by the princes and their parrot prophets, he enlisted dis- 
ciples in his cause, who were charged with the preservation of his 
teaching. 

Through a long life Isaiah made prophecy his career. To the au- 
thority that invested him as a spokesman of Yahweh he added the 
force of his character and gifts, his courage, his practical wisdom, 
and his consummate eloquence. He confronted Ahaz with counsel 
and warning that the king feared to question; he dared to ask Heze- 
kiah concerning the visit of the ambassadors from Babylon, as 
though he had a right to know. In a moment of terrified perplexity 
Hezekiah sent to him for advice. The prophet by his peremptory 
scathing words made and unmade ministers of the crown (22 15 f.). 
His knowledge of world affairs exceeded the range of Amos; his 
emotional nature, though no tenderer, was a richer instrument than 
Hosea’s. In the beauty, diversity, and power of his figured speech, 
he was the greatest among great poets, as he was the greatest among 
the prophets by virtue of insight and faith. 

After the Assyrians withdrew from Jerusalem in 701, and Zion 
remained inviolate, Isaiah ceased to prophesy. His mission was ac- 
complished. In the sequel his teaching must have seemed to his dis- 
ciples and their successors to be thwarted and vain. King Hezekiah, 
indeed, undertook reforms, which proved incomplete. Then the 
half-century that followed under Manasseh was a period of extreme 


reaction. The severe exalted worship of the God of righteousness en- 
; 363 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


joined by the prophets, in whatever measure it was accepted by the 
people, had not availed to deliver the kingdom from its enemies nor 
restore it to its former glories. Judah was still tributary to Assyria. 
Encouraged by the example of the king, the nation abandoned itself 
to the cult of foreign deities, hoping to win their favor, since Yahweh 
had failed of power to protect them. Fanatic zeal issued, so it is 
inferred, in persecution of the faithful remnant. In this bloody time, 
such hopes as struggled to expression may have come to record in 
passages that found shelter in the books ascribed to the great teach- 
ers of the preceding century. But no prophet now known by name 
uttered the word of Yahweh. 


Reaction ran its course. And the accession of the boy Josiah to 
the throne of Judah held promise of a better day for Yahweh’s cham- 
pions. Again, as a century before, prophets arose to bring tidings to 
the nation. Of these the first was Zephaniah, whose name is signifi- 
cant of the evil times that prophecy endured, — “Yahweh hath 
hidden.”’ But again, as formerly, it was a message of denunciation 
and of doom. From the north, danger threatened, not now Assyria, 
for the colossus which had trampled down the world was staggering 
to its fall; but along its tracks a horde of savage horsemen were 
swarming toward the coastland. In the coming of the Scythians, 
about 726, Zephaniah saw God’s visitation upon Judah and Jeru- 
salem. 

Of princely birth and resident in the capital, the prophet looks out 
over his corrupt city. Beyond the horizon of its northern hills, he 
discerns the ruin gathering upon the earth, the consuming fire of 
God’s anger. It is the notable Day of Yahweh, near and hasting 
greatly. But instead of the day of promise, of eagerly and long 
awaited triumph, it is a day of wrath and trouble and distress, of 

364 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


trumpet and alarm, of clouds and gloom and desolation. So Amos 
had proclaimed the day of brighter expectation as darkness and not 
light; and Isaiah had announced a day of Yahweh of hosts upon all 
that is proud and haughty which shall be brought low. Zephaniah 
elaborates the awesome theme. The destruction will be complete, 
consuming every living creature, beast, bird, and fish, and cutting off 
man from off the face of the ground. In the sobbing rhythm of the 
dirge, the prophet chants the ruin that will smite the cities of the 
Philistines, lay waste Ethiopia and Assyria, and will make Nineveh 
a desolation, — which last was fulfilled in twenty years. Yahweh 
will stretch out his hand upon Judah and all the inhabitants of Jeru- 
salem. In the day of Yahweh’s wrath, the whole land shall be de- 
voured by the fire of his jealousy, for he will make a terrible end of 
all them that dwell in the land. 

The utter devastation that Zephaniah sees impending is the pun- 
ishment of the nation’s sins. Like his predecessors of the century 
before, he declares Yahweh’s anger against his wicked, perverse, 
unfaithful people, — yet with a difference. The old iniquities are 
still rampant: the princes of Jerusalem are roaring lions, her judges 
are evening wolves, her prophets are light and treacherous persons; 
her priests have profaned the sanctuary. But furthermore, the long 
period of loose errancy under Manasseh had left its mark. Now 
Zephaniah condemns the foreign customs and alien worship which 
possessed the people, high and low. With a finer discrimination, he 
distinguishes among the miscreants: the apostates, “that are turned 
back from following Yahweh”’; those born into idolatry, “that have 
not sought Yahweh, nor inquired after him”’; and finally the skeptics, 
who have wearily lapsed into indifference, “the men that are thick- 
ened upon their lees, that say in their heart, Yahweh will not do 


good, neither will he do evil.’”” And now Jerusalem must bear an 
365 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


added guilt, for she has sinned against the light. The oppressing 
city is rebellious and polluted. 


She obeyed not the voice; 

She received not instruction; 
She trusted not in Yahweh; 
She drew not near to her God. 


The nation had rejected its prophets and made their labors vain. 

Powerful to strike with terror in imagery of fire and ravage, 
Zephaniah has but a single constructive ideal, echoing the reiterated 
precepts of his forerunners: “Seek righteousness, seek meekness; it 
may be that ye will be hid in the day of Yahweh’s anger.” 


Shortly before the fall of Nineveh in 606, which Zephaniah had 
foretold, a Judahite poet anticipates the event in verses of tremendous 
picture-making energy. The catastrophe but impends. Dramati- 
cally the poet hails it as enacting before his exultant gaze. He sees 
the conqueror drawing to the attack, the violent irresistible assault, 
the fall of the proud city. 


The shield of his mighty men is made red, 

The valiant men are in scarlet: 

The chariots flash with steel in the day of his preparation, 
And the cypress spears are shaken terribly. 


The chariots rage in the streets; 

They justle one against another in the broad places: 
The appearance of them is like torches; 

They run like the lightnings. 
The gates of the rivers are opened, 

And the palace is dissolved. 

Huzzab is uncovered, she is carried away; 

And her handmaids moan as with the voice of doves, 
Tabering upon their breasts. 


366 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


Assyria, whose device was the lion, ravaged the earth like the veri- 
table king of beasts. At last he and all his brood are brought to bay. 


Where is the den of the lions, 

And the feeding-place of the young lions, 
Where the lion and the lioness walked, 

The lion’s whelp, and none made them afraid? 


The lion did tear in pieces enough for his whelps, 
And strangled for his lionesses, 
And filled his caves with prey, 
And his dens with ravin. 
Then follows the sack of the city. The poet caresses his fierce 
imagery. 
The noise of the whip, and the noise of the rattling of wheels, 
And prancing horses, and jumping chariots, 
The horsemen charging, and the flashing sword, and the glittering spear, 


A multitude of slain, and a great heap of carcases; 
There is no end of corpses; they stumble upon their corpses. 


The author of this taunt-song was counted by the compilers of the 
Hebrew scriptures as a prophet. But this is not the note of Amos, 
Hosea, Micah, Isaiah. In the Book of Nahum there is no concern to 
vindicate the righteousness of Yahweh, no condemnation of his 
people’s sins. It is indeed the poet’s own God who executes venge- 
ance. Now, however, punishment falls not on Judah for its iniqui- 
ties, but on Assyria for wrongs done to other peoples, of whom Judah 
was one. “Behold, I am against thee, saith Yahweh of hosts, and | 
will show the nations thy nakedness, and the kingdoms thy shame.” 
The singer rejoices with quite human joy over the downfall of the 
world’s oppressor. 

Nahum is a poet rather than a prophet. His faith in Yahweh is the 
traditional faith of Israel. He brings no ethical or religious message; 


rather, he is the spokesman of his fellow Judahites. In unloosed 
367 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


fervor of speech at a moment of explosive release, with blazing in- 
tensity of image, he utters emotions that have not elsewhere found 
expression. His is the heightened eloquence of the nations that were 
ground into mute dust by the heel of the omnipotent ruthless foe. 
The humiliations of countless bitter years are transmuted suddenly 
to triumph; the silenced hatreds of generations cry aloud in this 
shout of vindictive exultation. Herein Nahum illustrates the shad- 
ows of Israel’s temper. The great prophets, laboring in active op- 
position to the mass opinions and currents of their time, stood alone. 
Nahum, lifted on the surge of popular feeling, becomes the voice of 
the crowd. In his taunt-song, echoing the ferocity and scorn of an- 
cient days when the tribes rallied to battle against Sisera, resounds 
the secular passion of his race. 


Nineveh, lair of the Assyrian lion, was blotted out. To her domin- 
ion succeeded Chaldean Babylon. Two years before her fall, — in 
608, King Josiah of Judah, who had carried through the reforms 
ordained by the Book of the Law, was killed in battle with the Egyp- 
tians at Megiddo. His son Jehoahaz had reigned but three months 
when he was taken captive by the victorious Pharaoh Necho, who 
set upon the Judean throne the deposed king’s half-brother Jehoia- 
kim. The new monarch proved a wicked ruler, apostate, covetous, 
oppressive, loving luxury. A vassal of Egypt on his accession, and 
afterward tributary to Babylon when the Chaldean Nebuchadrezzar 
had defeated the Egyptians at Carchemish in 605, he introduced 
into Judah the execrable cults of Egypt and Assyria, to the hurt 
of Yahweh’s true worship. After three years Jehoiakim rebelled 
against his overlord of Babylon. The Chaldeans invaded his king- 
dom; when his son Jehoiachin had reigned but three months, in 597, 
they sacked Jerusalem, and deported its chief citizens to the number 

368 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


of ten thousand. None remained save the poorest sort of the people 
of the land. 

In darkness and disaster, when Yahweh seemed withdrawn in 
aloof and awful majesty, manifesting himself only to punish and not 
to save his desperate people, there were thinkers in Judah who 
dared to question God’s ways. Habakkuk was termed a prophet, — 
justly in the measure that he proclaimed the divine purpose. In atti- 
tude, however, he was a skeptic, not wholly doubting, but desiring 
knowledge, seeking ardently to discern truth, which other prophets 
had assumed as absolute. Yahweh is a God of righteousness, of 
justice. Yet the prophet-thinker sees evil on every side, destruction, 
violence, strife; the wicked oppress the righteous; and justice is per- 
verted. Why should it be so? 

Therefore Habakkuk addresses himself, not like his predecessors 
to the nation with words of censure, but to God with questionings. 
How long will Yahweh suffer iniquity to prevail? The seeker’s faith 
supports him. “Art thou not from everlasting, O Yahweh, my God, 
my Holy One? we shall not die.”” But the problem is greater than he 
can solve. 


Thou that art of purer eyes than to behold evil, 

That canst not look on perverseness, 

Wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, 

And holdest thy peace when the wicked swalloweth up the 
man that is more righteous than he? 


That Yahweh is raising up the dread Chaldeans to punish the wicked 
but complicates the problem. For the Chaldeans, bitter and hasty 
nation, that march through the breadth of the earth to possess dwell- 
ing-places that are not theirs, coming all of them for violence and 
gathering captives as the sand, they too are guilty in their turn. 
Shall the righteous God only use the wicked as his instrument, and 
not punish them? So the answer is still farther removed. With the 
369 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


devoted courage of a sincere true skeptic, able to confront his prob- 
lem, whether the cost to him be evil or good, Habakkuk awaits the 


issue. 


I will stand upon my watch, 

And set me upon the tower, 

And I will look forth to see what he will speak with me, | 
And what I shall answer concerning my complaint. 


And Yahweh spoke with him, and said, 


Write the vision, and make it plain upon tablets, 

That he may run that readeth it. 

Behold, his — the Chaldean’s — soul is puffed up, 
it is not upright in him; 

But the righteous shall live by his faithfulness. 

His questionings answered, the prophet announces a series of woes 
upon drunkenness, rapacity, violence, idolatry, after the manner of 
his predecessors, notably Isaiah; allusively he quotes (2 12-14) Micah, 
Isaiah, and Jeremiah. In his grasp of abstract principles, he reveals 
a new reflective and generalizing power. Though Habakkuk lacks 
the absolute indefeasible conviction that sustained his fellows, the 
lesson that he taught of patient faith won through doubt, was needed 
in his day, when the foundations of the nation, its political existence 
and all individual security, were crumbling. Within two decades, 
the Chaldeans, in their second onslaught, destroyed Jerusalem and 
swept the people into captivity. 


Through the crowded years that Zephaniah, Nahum, and Habak- 
kuk prophesied, another and greater prophet was active at Jerusa- 
lem, urgent by word and deed to counsel, censure, and threaten his 
perplexed countrymen. Jeremiah began his labors at the same time 
as Zephaniah, about 626, when Judah was menaced by the Scythian 
invasion; and still as Yahweh’s spokesman he was taken into Egypt 

370 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


with the colonists whom the Chaldeans had left in Judah after the 
destruction of Jerusalem in 586. Curiously as it seems, though these 
four prophets were contemporary, none, except Habakkuk and he 
only indirectly, takes note of any other. Jeremiah, however, showed 
himself amply acquainted with the writings of his predecessors of the 
century before. Among them the teacher who exercised the greatest 
influence upon him was Hosea. 

Like the elder prophet of Yahweh’s love for his errant people, 
Jeremiah was a man of extreme sensibility, capable of the deepest 
tenderness. Sprung from a family of priests resident in the village of 
Anathoth a few miles northeast of the capital, he felt himself, despite 
his shrinking nature, to have been predestined to his arduous calling. 
Though he considered himself but a child, Yahweh would make him 
to be as a defenced city and an iron pillar and brazen walls against 
the whole land of Judah, its kings, princes, priests, and people. Ex- 
perience proved that he had need of the utmost fortitude. 

Entering upon the work to which Yahweh had commissioned him, 
Jeremiah takes up the burden of his forerunners. In his earliest ad- 
dresses, adopting the tone and imagery of Hosea, he proclaims anew 
the secular infidelity of the nation, which had incontinently swerved 
from the devotion of its youth and grievously wounded God’s love. 
Yahweh had planted Israel a noble vine, a wholly right seed, but now 
it is turned into the degenerate branches of a foreign vine. The peo- 
ple have forsaken the fountain of living waters, and have hewed them 
out cisterns, and these indeed broken cisterns, that can hold no 
water. With piteous pleading again and again Yahweh reproaches 
his backsliding adulterous children; he is eager mercifully to pardon, 
if only the people would return to him. But they have remained ob- 
durate. In vain the chastisements which God visited upon them; 
they would receive no correction, but slew the prophets. Not only 

371 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the ignorant and foolish have sinned; even more culpable are the 
ruling classes, who should have known God’s commandments. If 
the folk have stupidly gone after the false gods of their fields, how 
guilty are the privileged, who arrogantly deny Yahweh altogether 
and vaunt themselves on their fancied security: for they say, “It is 
not he; neither shall evil come upon us; neither shall we see sword nor 
famine.” The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule at 
their hands; and the people love to have it so. Of repentance there is 
no longer any hope. Therefore at last and irrevocably, destruction 
is coming from the north, to overwhelm the iniquitous and apostate 
nation. 

Such was the tenor of Jeremiah’s earlier discourses, in the reign of 
Josiah. And throughout his long tempestuous life, he ceased not to 
reiterate his charges against the people’s sins and infidelity, and to 
threaten punishment. To this extent, except for the stamp of his 
individuality upon phrase and image, Jeremiah seems to add little to 
the now familiar prophetic indictment. He had besides much in 
common with the methods of his fellows, in respect of significant 
visions and the performance of symbolic acts to reénforce his teach- 
ing. Two themes of his doctrine, however, become salient; and he is 
distinguished among all the prophets by certain qualities of temper. 

Isaiah, though he condemned the idolatrous practices of Judah, 
affirmed the inviolability of the Temple. His teaching, vindicated 
throughout a century, had won for itself the authority of a dogma, 
which the heedless people with ready overconfidence accepted as the 
assurance of their security in the midst of thick-coming alarms. Not 
so Jeremiah. In the very gate of the Temple, he cries to the throng- 
ing worshippers: 

Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of Yahweh, the 
temple of Yahweh, the temple of Yahweh, are these. For if ye thor- 

372 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


oughly amend your ways and your doings; if ye thoroughly execute 
justice between a man and his neighbor; if ye oppress not the so- 
journer, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in 
this place, neither walk after other gods to your own hurt: then will I 
cause you to dwell in this place. ... Will ye steal, murder, and commit 
adultery, and swear falsely — a clear reference to the Ten Words — 
and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye have 
not known, and come'and stand before me in this house, which is 
called by my name, and say, We are delivered; that ye may do all 
these abominations? Is this house, which is called by my name, be- 
come a den of robbers in your eyes? 


But because the people have not hearkened to the word of Yahweh 
spoken by his prophets, therefore the Temple wherein they trust 
shall be like the ancient venerable sanctuary of Shiloh laid in ruins. 

In these crashing sentences, reaching the inmost centre of cherished 
belief, sweeping away the last prop of traditional practice, Jeremiah 
proclaims anew and finally the characteristic prophetic doctrine of 
the falsity and futility of mere ritual. Then he takes a step beyond 
his predecessors. They had rested their case on the covenant be- 
tween Yahweh and Israel made at the beginning. Because Yahweh 
had chosen Israel to be his people, they owed him fealty. In that 
they had gone after other gods, in that their social iniquities did 
violence to the nature and demands of Yahweh as a God of right- 
eousness, they had transgressed the covenant. The compact was with 
the whole nation as an entirety. But now Yahweh will make a new 
covenant, no longer imposed upon all without discrimination and 
objectively valid as a general law, but binding upon each person be- 
cause it receives his individual willing acceptance. “I will put my 
law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will 
be their God, and they shall be my people: and they shall teach no 
more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 

373 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Know Yahweh; for they shall all know me, from the least of them 
unto the greatest.”” The seed was planted of old; the growth, pre- 
carious but passionately nurtured, here opens into flower. 

Of all the prophets Jeremiah has left the most detailed record of 
his experiences and the fullest revelation of his personality. The dis- 
courses which he had spoken through more than twenty years he dic- 
tated to a faithful scribe, Baruch; and when King Jehoiakim with 
angry contempt cut and cast the roll piece by piece into the brazier 
burning before him until it was consumed, then Baruch wrote upon 
a new roll all the words of the first book with many additions. The 
narratives interwoven with the prophecies tell a thrilling story of the 
persecutions to which Jeremiah was constantly subjected. His towns- 
men of Anathoth, perhaps jealous of the priestly rights which they 
felt the prophet had assailed so irreverently, sought his life. As a 
consequence of his blasphemous words concerning the destruction of 
the Temple, the priests and the nationalist prophets and all the peo- 
ple laid hold on him, saying, Thou shalt surely die. Jeremiah was 
rescued from their fury only by the intervention of the princes and 
by certain of the elders of the land, who cited in his defence the par- 
allel instance of Micah in the days of Hezekiah. Following upon an 
address delivered in the Temple court, the chief officer of the Temple, 
a priest’s son, smote Jeremiah, and imposed upon him the public 
humiliation of the stocks. When the Chaldeans had withdrawn from 
the siege of Jerusalem because of the advance of an Egyptian army, 
the prophet attempted to visit his native village. As he was leaving 
the city, he was arrested at the gate as a deserter to the Chaldeans; 
the princes had him flogged and thrown into prison. After many 
days King Zedekiah released him that he might ask the prophet’s 
counsel, and then transferred him to the court of the guard. The 
princes had good reason to pursue Jeremiah with their hostility, for 

374 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


he continually advised surrender to the besiegers, that the capital 
might be spared total destruction. Accordingly on the charge that 
he weakened the hands of the soldiers and the people, seeking not 
their welfare but their hurt, the princes, with the forced assent of the 
king, cast the prophet into a deep dungeon to die in the mire. Thence 
he was drawn out by an Ethiopian eunuch, now with the secret con- 
nivance of the vacillating monarch, — concealed for fear of the 
princes. Once more Zedekiah asked counsel of the prophet, and re- 
ceived the same reply: Surrender or perish. The king, however, 
promised not to put him to death nor to deliver him into the hands of 
the men that sought his life. But Jeremiah abode in the court of the 
guard until the day that Jerusalem was taken. Treated with distin- 
guished favor by the victorious Chaldeans, the prophet signally with- 
out honor in his own country chose to remain in Judah. Finally 
against his will and contrary to his advice, he was carried off by the 
refugees into Egypt. 

It was not easy to be a prophet in the day of Judah’s eclipse. And 
often Jeremiah faltered. Bitterly aware of his innate weaknesses, 
yet he knew himself to be fortified for his task by the strength of 
Yahweh. But not without protest and questionings. ““O Yahweh, 
thou hast persuaded me, and I was persuaded; thou art stronger than 
I and hast prevailed.”’ At terrible cost to himself. “I am become a 
laughing-stock all the day, every one mocketh me. For as often as I 
speak, I cry out; I cry, Violence and destruction; because the word 
of Yahweh is made a reproach unto me, and a derision, all the day.” 
Sensitive, idealistic, yearning for affection, but denied by Yahweh’s 
decree the consolations of wife and children, reaping only hatred and 
calumny, he felt to the quick the hostility of those who should have 
been his familiar friends; of the nobles, the priests, and the servile 
prophets, the enmity was natural and inevitable, but even his breth- 

375 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


ren and the house of his father, even they dealt treacherously with 
him: and he writhed under the contumely and shameful indignities 
heaped upon him beyond endurance. Withheld from him were the 
homely, common, pathetic joys of life. He might not enter the house 
of mourning to bring comfort nor the house of feasting. “I sat not in 
the assembly of them that make merry nor rejoiced; I sat alone 
because of thy hand.” As with his people in the day of God’s vis- 
itation, so for the lonely prophet — ever silence and darkness: no 
voice of mirth or of gladness, no voice of bridegroom and bride, no 
sound of the millstones nor light of the lamp. Afflicted not only by 
the sorrows that smote himself, he suffered in his own person anguish 
for the ruin of his nation. “Oh that my head were waters, and mine 
eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the 
slain of the daughter of my people!”’ That his message had to be a 
sentence of doom, a counsel of despair, wounded him to the heart. 
At moments, so intolerable were his grief and struggle and humilia- 
tion, he cursed his birth. ‘Woe is me, my mother, that thou hast 
borne mea man of strife and contention to the whole earth!” “‘ Cursed 
be the day wherein I was born. ... Wherefore came I forth out of 
the womb to see labor and sorrow, that my days should be consumed 
with shame?” He carried his plea direct to Yahweh, with anxious 
doubt: “Why is my pain perpetual, and my wound incurable, which 
refuseth to be healed? Wilt thou indeed be unto me as a deceitful 
brook, as waters that fail)’”’ “Righteous art thou, O Yahweh, when 
I contend with thee; yet would I reason the cause with thee: Where- 
fore doth the way of the wicked prosper? wherefore are all they at 
ease that deal very treacherously>”” — echoing the skeptic Habak- 
kuk and anticipating Job. Despite his anguished fears, he had no 
lack of courage on occasion to face his enemies squarely; he could 


rise from tke depths to call for vengeance upon them. 
376 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


In the issue, the compulsions of the divine charge laid upon him 
overcome his weakness. 


If I say, I will not make mention of him, nor speak any more in his 
name, then there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in 
my bones, and I am weary with forbearing, and I cannot contain. 

O Yahweh, thou knowest: know that for thy sake I have suffered 
reproach. Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy words 
were unto me a joy and the rejoicing of my heart: for I am called by 
thy name, O Yahweh, God of hosts. 


So through swift alternations of despair and assurance, of question- 
ings and insight, the prophet triumphs over the man, by Yahweh’s 
power. 

Sustained in his bitterest suffering and frustration by his fervent, 
idealistic, all-possessing love of God, Jeremiah incarnated the genius 
of Israel in its finest essence. 


Abrupt, incomprehensible, terrific, these preachers of righteous- 
ness and disaster. But prophets were familiar figures in Israel from 
even before the days of King Saul. Roving through the countryside, 
moving about the streets of cities, mingling with the crowds at the 
high places, recognizable by dress and demeanor, they had a ready 
and curious hearing. Then suddenly, when storm clouds gathered on 
the northern horizon ominously as never before in turbulent, war- 
torn Israel, men of God frighted the people with strange new sen- 
tences. They were like prophets, yet different by the tenor of their 
words: instead of encouragement, — censure and threatening; in- 
stead of good fortune, — doom. They spoke in the name of Yab- 
weh, but not the Yahweh whom Israel worshipped so zealously. The 
people listened with eagerness, amazement, anger, defiance. 

The world which these flaming messengers projected upon the 

377 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


astonishment of their hearers was indeed Israel’s world, but seen 
in another light. The life of the shepherd, the peasant, the city- 
dweller; the tarnished majesty of kings, the intrigues of politicians, 
the perfidy of priests and prophets, the crimes of the powerful, the 
debauchery of the rich, the deceits of the trader; the wild throngs 
at the hillside altars, their drunken revelry, the blood and smoke 
of sacrificial flesh; the menace of drought or storms, of famine and 
pestilence, the alarms of war, the homely joys of quietness: — all 
these and more were plastic in their hands, moulded to high and col- 
ored relief. But athwart this familiar world, drenching it with lurid 
gleam or thick darkness, tearing away its cherished things and shak- 
ing its foundations, swept cataclysmic wrath and fire and destruc- 
tion, terror on every side, invoked in the name of Israel’s God. 

In their speech was something mysterious, remote yet piercingly 
actual, something pregnant, provocative. The addresses as spoken 
were brief, sententious; oracular, they were cast in rhythmic form. 
Whether consciously or not, they were fashioned to compel atten- 
tion, to startle, terrify. When the oracles were written down, they 
were combined into larger units, but without a controlling principle 
of arrangement as a whole; and the “Books” of the prophets were 
subjected to many later editings with additions, before they found 
their place in the canon of scripture. Upon their hearers these swift 
sharp utterances crashed overwhelmingly, though they roused 
princes and populace to violent antagonism. They were charged 
with instant practical meanings, calling to deliberate act; fraught 
with highest spiritual import, they were worthy of being pondered: 
but spoken in the heat of scornful condemnation, of pleading pity, of 
yearning love, they kindled or seared with the flame of their enthusi- 
asm. Imagination transmutes the near, and ranges far, to conjure 
images for the prophets’ emotions. Sensitive response to the com- 

378 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


plexities of human feeling, delight in landscape, knowledge of the 
ways of beasts and birds, a keen awareness of nature’s workings, 
manifest in the sun beneficent or blasting, in the winds, the dew, the 
rains, give immediacy to their urgent message. Close to actuality, 
weighted with thought, illumined by insight, yet their glowing 
speech fuses the will by the ardor of its conviction. Moral earnest- 
ness, the fervor of religion, reach the intensity of passion. 


The great prophets addressed the crowd, but they were not dema- 
gogues; they were destructive critics indeed, but not agitators; 
reformers, they were not revolutionaries. If they spoke on behalf of 
the poor and humble, it was not as champions of one class opposed 
to another, but as preachers of divine justice, holiness and loving- 
kindness. Not class but condition was the object of their solicitude; 
it was the defenceless of whatever station, the widow and fatherless 
children, the impoverished without a helper, the sojourner lacking 
civil rights, for whom they had regard. They did not, with words 
that cajoled their hearers, incite the hatred of one class against 
another: they charged the very sinners themselves with their own 
proper sins; all classes were guilty, each in its own way. They were 
not self-regarding; they sought no material advantage, no profit 
for one at the cost of another. Not the amelioration of class condi- 
tions for its own sake was their aim, but the doing of God’s will. 
Whether in condemnation or in pleading, the standard they applied 
in judgment, the motive that impelled them, was less concern for 
man than love of God. In passing censure on their times, they at- 
tacked individual kings for their personal wickedness; they bitterly 
assailed the venality of unfaithful priests and false prophets and cor- 
rupt judges; with fiery scorn they inveighed against the licentious- 


ness and oppressive greed of the nobles: all of whom should have been 
379 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the upright rulers and trustworthy guides of the people. But they 
did not question the established order of state and society; not in the 
system of government, but in the persons representing it, they de- 
manded reform, a change not of frame but of heart. Their incentive 
purpose was not social and merely human; it was altogether reli- 
gious, prompted by love of the divine. The great prophets were patri- 
ots, seeking utterly the welfare of their country, grieved for the hurt 
of all their people, and yearning passionately for the healing of the 
whole nation by the power of God. 

So complete was their devotion, so intimately was religion the 
pulse of the national life, it was natural that the prophets should 
touch the tangled politics of their day, not however as popular agi- 
tators, but wholly and always as spokesmen of Yahweh. Their 
interest in the national policy, notably in foreign affairs, was a 
religious interest; they saw that the fate of Israel’s religion, which 
was for them the only true religion, was bound up with the future of 
the people. Their knowledge of the world and their political acumen 
fitted them to be statesmen of the highest wisdom; but they moved 
to their task of criticism and decision ever as prophets. So little 
were they revolutionaries or party leaders that their advice, though 
it counted powerfully with the kings, was contrary to the mass opin- 
ion, and they had no popular following. They were not concerned 
for the expediency of the instant, for the temporary fortune of the 
state; the course of action which they urged, seemingly inconsistent 
with itself as to detail in various crises, had reference solely to the 
requirements of Yahweh, demanding absolute faith in him and 
practical conformity to his will; in Israel’s contacts with foreign 
states they counselled, as the case might be, resistance or surrender, 
independence or submission. They had but one guiding principle, 


their single criterion: it was the paramountcy of religion in all life, 
380 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


the true religion of Yahweh. They preached exclusive reliance upon 
Yahweh’s power to coerce nations and events to the fulfilment of his 
divine purposes. If only the people remained loyal and pure in their 
allegiance to him, whether the Hebrew state survived or fell was of 
less moment than obedience to his commands and the right worship 
of Yahweh as the all-sovereign God. 

To their contemporaries the great prophets may have seemed 
revolutionary, for they constantly proclaimed the destruction of the 
nation. What the people failed to grasp was the fact that the threat- 
ened disaster was the direct consequence of their own sins. The 
prophets did not incite to the overthrow of the state; they saw it to 
be inevitable. It was to be brought about by the considered act of 
Yahweh as punishment which the iniquities of the nation had made 
necessary. The prophets foresaw and declared the destruction to 
come. In general, they depended on prediction only to this extent, — 
according to measure that a cause must be followed by its appro- 
priate effect. Often indeed they announced events in the future 
which did not come to pass as they had said; they had no means of 
reckoning not liable to ordinary error. Prediction for its own sake 
was not their mission; that might be left to the soothsayers and the 
popular prophets. They based their threats of impending disaster, 
not on any gift of supernatural foresight, but on their own sure 
knowledge of Yahweh’s character and purpose. So God would pun- 
ish and destroy, for cause. 

But he would not make a “full end.”” A remnant would return to 
Yahweh in repentance and righteousness. God would restore the 
old forms, but purified. The call to repentance, often a despairing 
call, yet sounded the hope that better things were possible. From 
the iniquities, miseries, and utter distress of their own day, the 
prophets looked forward to a new kingdom, its ruler truly God’s 

381 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


“anointed.” As compensation for the evils of the present, the proph- 
ets discerned, in rare moments of illumined daring, dimly a kingdom 
of the future, but a kingdom upon earth, wherein the reign of the 
righteous prince would be attended with the blessings of material 
well-being. The redeemed of Israel would live again a people fash- 
ioned after God’s own design, dwelling in Yahweh’s kingdom of 
righteousness. The preachers of punishment and disaster were cre- 
ators. 

Among all classes there were evils, even as the prophets pictured 
them, but these exponents of divine righteousness saw the human 
evils, not in their just perspective, but distorted by the contrast with 
what they felt so passionately ought to be. Surely, in the mass, the 
nation was corrupt. Quite naturally the folk worshipped the gods of 
the soil, the givers of material increase, invoking the baals by the 
name of Yahweh, because the simple peasants were unable to dis- 
tinguish the false from the true. The powerful practised oppression, 
which fell most heavily upon the humble. Justice was perverted by 
bribery, to the advantage of the rich and the injury of the poor. The 
priests were mercenary, encouraging lavish sacrifices for the sake of 
the revenue that accrued to them. The wealthy were dissolute: the 
women drunken and incontinent; the men unscrupulous in all rela- 
tions of life. Doubtless the Hebrews were no more and no less wicked 
than other peoples. The wonder is not that there were evils in Israel- 
ite society, but that there were men who perceived them. The 
depths in which the prophets figured the people indicate the heights 
on which the prophets stood. 

In demanding reform of the nation’s ways, as token and pledge of 
obedience to God’s sublime will, the prophets had no thought of pro- 
claiming anything new. Their reference was to the elder days. 
Israel heedlessly or wantonly had strayed afar, so they believed, from 

382 


i ee _ 


THE GREAT PROPHETS 


the true and pure piety of its youth; now it should seek again the old 
paths and walk therein. In pleading so insistently for a return, they 
assumed on the people's part the knowledge of Yahweh’s demands. 
Apparently they were not themselves aware of the progress in ethical 
and religious thought which each contributed to his own time; for 
them, the truths that they declared were absolute and self-evident. 
Coming at special crises in the catastrophic last years of the two 
Hebrew kingdoms, the great prophets brought a message suited to 
the immediate occasion. But above the exigencies of the moment, 
far beyond the present range of their hearers’ understanding, these 
preachers of God’s retributive righteousness proclaimed truths uni- 
versal and eternal. 

Seemingly the people went their inconstant reckless way, unheed- 
ing, obdurate. Israel and Judah were carried to dispersion and cap- 
tivity, their capitals were overthrown, the state perished, as the 
prophets had threatened, in punishment of a sinful and unrepentant 
nation. But desperate as was the prophets’ own view of their world, 
there was in fact a faithful remnant, however few. Words accusing, 
condemnatory, exciting the extreme of hostility, were yet not suf- 
fered to pass like breath into nothingness. Their oracles, spoken for 
an occasion, were written down, whether by the prophets them- 
selves, by devoted scribes, or by loyal disciples. Thus preserved, 
then cherished, they became, after the Exile, the sacred scriptures of 
later generations. So these great teachers were not altogether soli- 
tary, though against the mass they stood out as singular, and indeed 
unparalleled. The genius of the whole people, the racial qualities 
wrought through centuries to their finest temper, made possible the 
prophets. In them the character, the soul, of Israel attained com- 
pletest embodiment and expression. 

What the prophets pleaded for with utmost giving of all their 

383 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


powers was not beauty, art, joy of life, intellectual accomplishment, 
but righteousness and love of God. They were true to racial urge and 
to their individual calling. Israel’s supreme achievement, its distinc- 
tion among the nations, was its religion. 


XVII 
YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


Out of the unknown came a few tribes, whom a common fortune in 
wandering and settlement, in wars and peaceful toil, wrought into a 
nation. After a brief noon of glory, the nation split in twain. The 
petty kingdoms endured not four troubled centuries, and perished 
violently. As other and great nations rose and fell, so little Israel- 
Judah. But something of this people survived the overthrow of their 
state. Exile and return to the homeland in subjection to foreign 
powers changed the circumstances of their life but could not crush 
their spirit. Through all mutations of outer form, a continuity of 
temper and purpose determined the history of the Hebrews and dis- 
tinguished their achievement. The unifying force, the vital princi- 
ple, of their continuing experience, was their religion. 


Obscure in the mists before dawn, the beginnings of Israel’s reli- 
gion may be shadowed forth only by conjecture and wide inference. 
Early man, more aware of the world about him than conscious of 
himself, leaves no unequivocal record of his inner life. What he 
thinks and feels must be inferred from what he does. So the meaning 
of his objects of worship and the intention of his ritual are capable of 
a various interpretation, which is necessarily precarious. Some ele- 
ments of the tribal belief of the desert may be guessed from their 
likeness to survivals of ancient usages among the nomad Arabs of 
to-day, secular unchanging descendants of a stock kindred with the 
Hebrews. The religion of old Canaan, which the conquerors absorbed, 
has left its traces in the soil. Memories of ancestral custom, faded or 

385 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


transformed, lingered with the Israelites: but the scriptures recount- 
ing events long since past evoke the scene only as figured in imagina- 
tion; though they may echo good tradition, they are modified by the 
writers’ own conceptions or designs. What Israel’s religion became 
may be read authentically in the books of the great prophets. Any 
attempt to spell its origins must be satisfied merely to indicate possi- 
bilities. 

In primeval days, all things in nature, all of human life, were pene- 
trated by the mysterious, linked with the supernatural, pressed by 
the beyond-human. Powers hostile or kindly lurked everywhere; 
their enmity must be appeased, their favor gained. Charms and 
incantations were potent to coerce. Chiefly, sacrifice brought men 
into communion and right relations with their deities. In the desert, 
the night sky, spreading cool refreshing, excited their grateful wonder; 
winds and storms manifested dread forces; a special sacredness at- 
tached to trees and stones. One power, greater than all others, be- 
came the patron god of the tribe, of blood-kin with it. The relation- 
ship was natural, inevitable, the creation of untold ages of communal 
life. So the Hebrews, coming from the desert, had their protector 
god, their other objects of reverence and fear, their sacrifices and 
manner of worship, by immemorial custom. 

Some of the Hebrew tribes suffered bondage in Egypt. Thence 
they escaped, led by a man of genius, and wandered for years in the 
wilderness south of Canaan. All the narratives and the great proph- 
ets too, though they differ severally as to details, agree that Moses 
brought to his people a new revelation of one God, whose name was 
Yahweh. Whether Yahweh was already known to the tribes, whether 
he manifested himself for the first time to Moses in the land of Mid- 
ian, whether he was the god whom the Kenites worshipped from of 


old and whom the Hebrews now received as their own, cannot be 
386 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


resolved from the conflicting traditions. Israel’s religion unfolded 
into something different from the religions of all other peoples. The 
course of its development became possible to it somewhere and at 
some time, for the process must have had a beginning. The decisive 
moment seems to have been just here: to the events of the exodus 
and the sojourn in the wilderness, under the guidance of a great 
leader, the religion of Israel owed its distinctive essence. In place of 
the ancestral god of desert heritage, patron of his tribe from unre- 
membered ancientness, the Hebrews at a definite instant accepted 
by voluntary act a single specific deity revealed to them by name. 
Yahweh chose Israel to be his people; Israel acknowledged Yahweh 
to be its God. 

Originally, some gods were forces of nature. If Yahweh was that 
at first, yet he became much more. Seated on a mountain, perhaps 
volcanic, he was a deity manifest in cloud, storm, and lightning; the 
thunder was his voice. When the Hebrews moved to the conquest of 
Canaan, Yahweh indwelling in an ark was their God of war. As 
known progressively to Israel, he came to be a God with determinate 
and quite special character. By virtue of his proper name, he was a 
personal being, unique, not to be confounded with any other deities. 
Not only did he vindicate his exceeding divine might in the bringing 
of the tribes out of Egypt and through the wilderness. True to the 
obligations implied in the alliance between Yahweh and his people, 
he also showed his faithfulness, worthy of their trust. With Israel’s 
advance in knowledge of Yahweh, the arbitrary incomprehensible 
whim that roused the gods to blind action was transmuted into 
clear deliberate reasonable will, recognized increasingly as righteous- 
ness. 

In the relationship between Yahweh and Israel lay the kernel 
which flowered in the teaching of the prophets. The kernel itself con- 

387 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


sisted cnly in the bond which linked Yahweh with his worshippers, 
yet a bond woven of a singular intensity of feeling. When Israel was 
a child, then Yahweh loved him, and called his son out of Egypt. He 
taught Ephraim to walk. He took them on his arms; he drew them 
with cords of a man, with bands of love; and he laid food before them. 
So Hosea phrased it in a later age, but with truth to the spirit of the 
early time. In return Israel, with all the fanatic passion of the desert 
strain, clave to its mighty and faithful God in enthusiasm and utter- 
most loyalty. Capable of persistent growth and wondrous flower, the 
kernel was as yet but rudimentary. For at the first, the relation of 
the tribes to their God was chiefly practical. Their worship secured 
Yahweh’s favor. His purposes regarding them must be consulted, 
that they might be certain of his effective approval; hence their 
resort to the mechanism of the sacred lot. By force of their com- 
mon acceptance of the one God, the tribes were brought together 
into a unity not only religious but political, out of which developed 
the nation. But from some moment onward, the religion of 
Israel had something that other religions had not; else Yahweh 
would have perished with Chemosh of Moab, Milcom of Ammon, 
with the many gods of Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria. This some- 
thing, able to unfold into the highest reaches of morality and 
spiritual faith, was present in the voluntary alliance between Israel 
and Yahweh. 


Yahweh, mountain God of storms and God of war, marching frem - 
the field of Edom, led his people to hard-won victory in Canaan. 
Then, while the tribes were gaining a foothold on the soil, Yahweh 
himself was forced into a struggle for his own existence. 

A farmer folk tilling the earth and breeding cattle, the Canaanites 
invoked the powers of fertility and reproduction. The chief god, 

388 | 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


whatever his individual proper name, was the Baal of the land, 
its owner and lord. Not a national god, worshipped as a single 
entity by a whole people, the baal was the deity of a place; and the 
baals were as many as the several localities which each held in 
ownership. So Canaanite sanctuaries were everywhere. Their rites 
were jubilant, abandoned, licentious: feasting issued in drunken- 
ness; devotion to the generative god was enacted in prostitution. 
Herein lay no possibility of moral advance. 

As the Hebrew conquerors gradually fused with the Canaanites, 
they adopted as their own the established shrines and appurtenant 
rites. To their ancestral usages of the days of wandering, to Passover 
and New Moon and Sheep-shearing, they added now the festivals 
appropriate to agriculture, — the spring feast of Unleavened Bread, 
the Feast of Harvest, signalizing the ripened grain, and the Feast of 
Ingathering, to celebrate the vintage. The god to whom now the 
Israelite peasants brought their offerings was Baal-Yahweh, for he 
had become the lord of the land and dispenser of bounty. Between 
the baal ruling the soil of Canaan and the Hebrew Yahweh, the 
farmer concerned for his own material welfare was unable to distin- 
guish. The fusion had important consequences for the future of 
Israel’s religion. Moreover, in effect, the contest between Yahweh 
and the baals involved a basic conflict between two forms of civiliza- 
tion. The newcomers were conservative in temper, proud of their 
tribal inheritance, jealous of ancestral glory, ascetic by constraint of 
desert meagreness, — the spirit which lived on to prompt the sect of 
the Rechabites and animated the austere intolerance of the prophets. 
But the life in Canaan allured irresistibly by its exuberance and re- 
laxations. The Canaanite material culture prevailed, though it re- 
ceived the impress of Israelite domination. In the issue of worship, 
Yahweh triumphed over all other gods, but only by the zeal of a few 

ies 389 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


devoted inspired men after a struggle that outlasted even the ruin of 
the state. . 

Yet the God of Sinai, who brought his people into the goodly land, 
gained much from his contest with the native baals. Deities are the 
creation of their worshippers. Conceived in emotion which attends 
experience of the external world, born of desire or fear, they are fash- 
ioned in men’s thought and moulded by circumstance. As the char- 
acter of a god thus reflects the nature of his people, so in turn it deter- 
mines their conduct and fate: the fortunes of both are linked in a 
common destiny. So it happened with Yahweh and Israel. The rigor 
of the nomad which beforetime limited Yahweh’s nature by the meas- 
ure of its own sparse intense simplicity was hostile to the enervating 
abundance of a riper civilization; and it would have perpetuated 
itself by tenacious desert custom but for the relaxations admitted to 
the worship of Yahweh in Canaan. The acceptance, even passive, of 
Baalism, which represented a more affluent and complex way of life, 
extended the scope of Yahweh’s power and attributes. A whole 
country, a plenteous land, became his for a possession; the range of 
his interests widened; to the wielder of storm and war was added the 
gracious giver of bounty. Yahwism was fertilized by Baalism. Thus 
enriched, it entered upon broader paths of development. 

Beset by the allurements and compulsions of settled life, yet the 
Israelites continued loyal to ancestral remembrance. Yahweh was 
still the God of all the people. But now the former cohesion of the 
tribes under a common leadership which brought them to the prom- 
ised land was resolved into local groupings of the countryside. In- 
stead of the onward march rallying to the single banner of the God 
of war, now each little community was in itself a centre of the wor- 
ship of the patron Lord Yahweh. From each village with its outlying 
fields, the people assembled at the high place for sacrifice and feasting. 

390 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


The hillside altar was a pile of earth or an unhewn rock, arched 
only by the sky. Close by it rose a pillar, Matstsebah, and a pole, 
Asherah, reminiscent of the sanctity of stones and trees, and bodying 
visibly forth the presence of the deity. At the instant of sacrifice, the 
altar was sprinkled or smeared with the blood of the victim; men 
might not eat the blood, for it was the life, and so was devoted to 
God: or else, more after the Canaanite manner, upon the altar parts 
of the slain animal were burned; thus sublimated in fire and smoke 
and savor, the meal was shared by the deity. So Yahweh smelled 
the sweet savor of Noah’s offering. So David said, “If it be that 
Yahweh hath stirred thee up against me, let him smell an offering.” 
And Amos: “I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.” God, 
though conceived as breath or spirit, was reached by material means. 
At one and another sanctuary of old renown, like Shiloh and Beth-el, 
the resort of pilgrims to the great yearly festivals, stood a temple, 
housing a sacred object or image, not indeed fashioned as a likeness, 
but in substantive form certifying the immediacy of Yahweh to his 
worshippers. Perhapsa rude structure in a timberless land, the temple, 
supported by posts, was closed by doors, and was lighted by a “lamp 
of God.’ Guardian of the shrine was a priest, who also cast the 
sacred lot for such as came to inquire of God. 

Worship in these elder artless days of husbandry was intimate and 
unconstrained. A farmer of the highlands of Ephraim, bringing his 
bullock of three years and measure of meal and skin of wine, went up 
from his hill village, Ramah, with his wives and children year by 
year to the sanctuary in Shiloh to worship and to sacrifice unto Yah- 
weh. Two priests were there; and their custom with the people was, 
that when any man offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while 
the flesh was boiling, with a flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand; and 
he stuck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that the 

391 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


flesh-hook brought up the priest took therewith. These two priests 
happened to be base fellows; for preferring roast meat to boiled, they 
sent their servant to ask to have the flesh given to them raw, thus 
demanding their perquisite even before the sacrifice to Yahweh. 
Their own gratification had no regard of sacredness; thinking only 
of themselves, they despised the offering of Yahweh. However, it 
was not the priest but the head of a family who slaughtered and 
made offering. When the day came that Elkanah sacrificed, burning 
the fat of the beast upon the altar for Yahweh, he gave to his family 
each a due portion of the feast; and they ate of the boiled flesh and 
drank of the wine. And they rose up in the morning early, and wor- 
shipped before Yahweh, and returned to their house. The manner 
of “worshipping before Yahweh” is not told. That it was something 
other than sacrifice may be inferred, for the feast was held on a 
preceding day. In Shiloh rested the Ark, which stood to the people 
for Yahweh’s presence; perhaps the worshippers did obeisance before 
it with gestures of prostration, and made supplication for divine 
favor to attend their ways. 

The yearly pilgrimages to the sanctuary were not the whole of 
religious practice. Any man might sacrifice, whenever there was 
cause. King Saul, leading his army against the Philistines, gave 
command: “Roll a great stone unto me this day. Bring me hither 
every man his ox, and every man his sheep, and slay them here, and 
eat.”’ And all the people brought every man his ox with him that 
night, and slew them there. And Saul built an altar unto Yahweh. 
Moreover, the approach to Yahweh was not limited to communal 
occasion, An individual might appoint his own private shrine. 
Gideon made an ephod — an oracular object associated with deity — 
out of gold taken as the spoils of war (Jud. 8 27). And Micah had a 
house of God; he made an ephod of silver, and teraphim; and he con- 

392 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


secrated one of his sons to be his priest. Nevertheless, when oppor- 
tunity was presented by chance, he was delighted to come by the 
ministrations of a Levite, a man trained professionally to the priestly 
office; and he grudged not the fee of ten pieces of silver by the year, 
and a suit of apparel, and his victuals. The migrating Danites car- 
ried off Micah’s images and his priest; and they set up a shrine of 
their own in their new home. 

The deity thus worshipped, the bestower of goods, approached 
rejoicingly with gifts of the first fruits of flock and field, and sharing 
in the feast, was a friendly God, accessible at all times and very near 
his people. Suppliants might come before him not only with offering 
but in petition. So Hannah prayed earnestly aloud to Yahweh to 
grant her a son; and for her part, in return, she bound herself by a 
vow to dedicate him to God’s service. So Saul offered a burnt offer- 
ing to entreat Yahweh’s favor; and he vowed himself and his follow- 
ers to abstinence that he might oblige Yahweh to give him victory. 
No enterprise of moment was undertaken without asking counsel of 
God. The overruling of Yahweh was ever present in men’s thought 
and feeling. His name was constantly on their lips, not merely in the 
customary formula of an oath, “ Yahweh do so to me and more also, 
if —” or “As Yahweh liveth,” but invoked in a spirit of real piety. 
David said, “ Yahweh that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, 
and out of the paw of the bear, he will deliver me out of the hand 
of this Philistine.’”’ The address of Abigail to David, ceremonious, 
ingratiating, quite instinctively makes appeal to Yahweh as the 
guide of action. “Now, therefore, my lord, as Yahweh liveth, and 
as thy soul liveth, seeing Yahweh hath withholden thee from blood- 
guiltiness, and from avenging thyself with thine own hand, now 
therefore let thine enemies, and them that seek evil to my lord, be 
as Nabal....The soul of my lord shall be bound in the bundle of 

393 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


life with Yahweh thy God.... And when Yahweh shall have dealt 
well with my lord, then remember thy handmaid.’”’ And David said 
to Abigail, ‘‘ Blessed be Yahweh, the God of Israel, who sent me this 
day to meet thee.” It is the voice of actual men and women as 
they felt and spoke. 

So in this morning time, men’s converse with the deity was simple, 
homely, spontaneous. The requirements of the cultus were not be- 
yond their power to fulfil. The technique of sacrifice, the distinction 
between clean and unclean, the necessities of performance or avoid- 
ance, the ordinary religious duties, whether practised by custom or 
taught by the priest, fell within their comprehension. Yahweh was 
present and real. To visit his sanctuary was to “see his face.” The 
gift was not too calculating, but offered thankfully. To sacrifice was 
to rejoice, eating and drinking before Yahweh. Religion was not 
conscious of itself. 

Of less scope than the great festivals, but cherished from ancestral 
days, were usages observed within the home. Thus the feast of the 
New Moon was kept by families. Disposed in private houses, also, 
were teraphim, images whose exact purpose is not known but which 
had some kind of sacredness. Burial sites held in especial reverence 
and invocation of departed spirits witness to acult of thedead. Below 
this level, all sorts of superstitions prevailed in the life of the individ- 
ual. To force the hidden present or penetrate the future, diviners 
plied their secret trade and conjured up the shadowy dead. Enchant- 
ers practised mysterious arts. Spirits active to injure might be 
averted by charms and amulets. Israel’s teachers strove to purge 
religion of these lower notions. But an emotional, unreflecting people 
did not easily distinguish between credulity and high faith. 

Though close to the interests of his people, and worshipped joy- 
ously, Yahweh was terrible, withdrawn from knowledge, compelling 

394 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


awe. There might proceed from him an evil spirit to trouble and 
betray. He stopped the ear of men from hearkening to correction, 
that he might slay them (1 Sam. 2 25); he prompted his favorite, 
David, to sin against him, seemingly that he might have warrant to 
punish all Israel for his wrath toward them (2 Sam. 24 1). Inscrutably 
he might break forth in sudden and fierce anger. But again, the 
terror emanating from his presence inhered in his divinity. After 
the fashion of men’s imaginings a person, stirred by human passions, 
yet as their God he was supremely, inexplicably holy, — so far not 
in a moral but only physical sense. Holiness was utter separateness; 
the holy thing was removed from common use except under condi- 
tions. Primarily attributed to deity, the quality might be communi- 
cated, to persons, things, places, times. God must not be approached 
save with due precaution; and objects penetrated with divinity 
might not be touched improperly without dire penalty. So Uzzah, 
reaching out his hand with natural impulse to steady the swaying 
ark, was smitten for his rashness, that he died. If Yahweh seemed to 
work unaccountably, exercising ruthless whim, it was his holiness in 
action, beyond men’s power or right to question. This dread essence 
of divinity by extension involved fateful issues. Thus war, as conse- 
crated to Yahweh, waged in his name and by his help, was a holy 
enterprise. Before battle, the oracle was consulted, sacrifice was 
offered, and the soldiers were enjoined to the observance of ritual 
prescriptions. The defeated foe, together with women and children, 
and often the spoils, were placed under the “ban’’: devoted to Yah- 
weh, they were given to destruction. It was a cruel God who sanc- 
tioned these practices and demanded the utmost of vengeance upon 
his enemies, — reflecting herein the temper of his worshippers. 
Yahweh was at once far off and near, benevolent patron but quickly 
moved to consuming wrath; he was both divine and human. 
395 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Gradually the attributes of Yahweh, his character and functions, 
were transformed with the changing circumstances of his people. 
As the God of Sinai led the Israelites to the conquest of Canaan as 
their God of war, and victorious, the warrior deity became lord of 
the land, Baal-Yahweh, so with the institution of the monarchy, the 
God of the tribes and of the local communities attained majesty and 
scope as the national God. His domain was still limited to Canaan. 
Though he was mightier than the gods of other peoples, his rule did 
not extend to their territories. So David, fleeing from Saul, com- 
plains that banished from the homeland, he can no longer worship 
Yahweh and benefit by his protection: “They have driven me out 
this day that I should have no share in the inheritance of Yahweh, 
saying, Go, serve other gods. Now therefore, let not my blood fall 
to the earth away from the presence of Yahweh!’’ Between the God 
of Israel, sovereign sure protector of his nation, and Yahweh, the 
righteous God of all the earth, lay eventful centuries. 


A tendency, latent in the purpose and the forms of worship, which 
began to develop as the Israelites established themselves upon the 
land, gathered momentum in signal fashion and measure when Solo- 
mon, having reared his sumptuous temple at the capital, endued the 
ritual with the splendor of multitudinous offerings. In the desert, 
sacrifice had been a rude and simple ceremony. An animal was 
slaughtered, the blood was poured out to the deity, and the flesh 
eaten by the worshippers: it signified, by token of the sacramental 
feast in common, the union of the tribesmen with their god. Differ- 
ent conditions induced a different attitude. As the Israelites pros- 
pered on the soil, offerings took on the intention of gifts, in gratitude 
for bounty conferred or solicitation of benefits desired. Because the 


wealth of the peasant, his grain and oil and wine, his cattle and 
396 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


sheep, surpassed in amount and variety the scant fare of the nomad, 
so sacrifices increased enormously in number and in kind. What the 
ritual became is lurid in the scorn of the prophets. At Beth-el and 
Gilgal were sacrifices every morning and tithes every three days, and 
a sacrifice of thanksgiving of that which is leavened, and ostenta- 
tious freewill-offerings (Am. 4 4). A veritable multitude of sacrifices, 
there were burnt-offerings, of the entire animal, and meal-offerings 
and the fat of peace-offerings. Notably at the dedication of the 
Temple, so it was reported, Solomon sacrificed two and twenty 
thousand oxen and a hundred and twenty thousand sheep. The 
numbers, however much exaggerated, are expressive of the general 
lavishness of sacrifice. The beasts fed and fatted for the reeking 
altars were rams and bullocks and lambs and he-goats. Throngs of 
worshippers pressed upon the sacred precincts and trampled Yahweh’s 
courts. Songs and the sound of viols were in their feasts. And gaily 
in the spirit of holiday, women flocked to the sanctuary, bedecked 
with nose-rings and jewels. The ceremonial at the shrine, which 
preceded the abandoned jollity of the feast, perhaps moved more 
solemnly. A command to silence: “Hold thy peace at the presence 
of the Lord Yahweh: for Yahweh hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath 
consecrated his guests!’’ (Zeph. 1 7.) The cloud and bemusing fra- 
grance of incense rises and mingles with the hush. At some moment 
in the rites, the suppliants kneel and kiss the image of embodied 
deity. Then the spreading forth of hands toward heaven in prayer. 
The prophet (Is. 1 15), overlooking the worshippers, sees these hands 
full of blood, the wet red blood of the instant slaughter of sacrifice, 
and, by metaphor, the blood of the victims of their iniquities. In 
Isaiah’s bitterly mocking words, charged with double meaning, was 
compressed the lesson concerning ritual that the prophets strove to 
teach. ‘‘Wash you, — literally and figuratively — make you clean; 
397 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


cease to do evil, learn to do well!”’ But the people, failing to grasp 
the moral implications of worship, went the crass round of extrava- 
gant sacrifice. | 

The worshippers believed that the greater the abundance of offer- 
ings, the more would Yahweh be inclined to bestow his favor. When 
the efficacy of the tribute seemed thus to be determined by its quan- 
tity, the old sense of intimate communion with God gave place to 
a more formal, wholly materialistic conception of religious obliga- 
tion. Sacrifice became communication rather than communion, — 
merely a means of reaching the deity for the suppliant’s own advan- 
tage. Inevitably though perhaps unwittingly, a changed attitude in 
worship resulted in a changed view of God. Yahweh became less the 
patron and more a monarch, less friendly, more despotic and remote, 
less immediate: at the royal chapel in Jerusalem, the national God 
was approached by the mediation of priests; and doubtless the people 
took note of the king’s example. The reign of Solomon was a culmi- 
nation anda beginning. In this brief but crowded noon, the stream of 
Israel’s religion, flowing broadly in the days of David, here was 
parted in mid-course, and henceforth the several currents ran along 
divergent ways. The cultus, blending old desert custom with Ca- 
naanite practice in the time before the monarchy, lingered with 
constant admixture of idolatry among the people throughout the 
countryside. The priests, gaining in worldly importance, developed 
ritualism ever more elaborately. Counter to these two currents, op- 
posing both equally, — on the one hand the popular cultus for its 
low aims, its grossness and license, and on the other hand the priestly 
ritual for its failure to apprehend the moral and spiritual nature of 
God, — the prophets taught the true religion. 


Gradually the changed conception of worship, which the Temple at 
398 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


Jerusalem both expressed and quickened with new impulse, brought 
advantage to the priesthood. As sacrifices increased in number and 
variety, the ritual involved became correspondingly complex, and so 
required more and more the services of a specialist. From the 
simplest beginnings, the priestly function drew powers to itself, as 
religion kept pace with Israel’s material and political advance. In 
the old days any man might offer sacrifice acceptably; there was no 
need of a priest. The priest’s office was to make known God’s will by 
means of the sacred lot, and to give Torah, the direction or law of 
Yahweh. Where a temple existed, he was its custodian. As their 
counsellor in all grave matters, the priest was intimately linked with 
the life of his fellows in the local community. 

As the technique of sacrifice became more intricate, stress was 
laid upon correctness of procedure. To sin was to miss the mark, to 
fall short, to err in performance, with no moral implication. When 
the manner of the act was thus of chief concern, the spontaneous 
emotion of familiar rejoicing before Yahweh was constrained to more 
rigid forms, which developed into a highly organized praxis. The 
conduct of worship, therefore, tended to pass to the sole keeping of 
the priests; they alone, by virtue of special training, had the requisite 
knowledge. It was to the interest of their own dignity and influence 
to elaborate the ritual element in religion. Supported by perquisites 
derived from a share in the offerings, they may well have found it 
profitable to demand a greater frequency of occasion and to encour- 
age lavishness of gifts. With this emphasis upon ceremonial, the 
priests became a class apart. In general, the office was hereditary, 
limited to certain families, though others might be appointed. 

With the founding of the monarchy, religion took on an official or 
state character. Priests now installed at the king’s court ranked 
among the greatest dignitaries of the nation. At the high places and 

399 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the local shrines, sacrifice continued to be offered with the minister- 
ing codperation of the home priests, and these were still associated 
with the old popular religion; but between them and the hierarchs at 
Jerusalem, the difference was ever widening. The ancient sanctu- 
aries, to which the people were wont to resort, yielded their authority 
if not their allurements to the growing prestige of the Temple; and 
favored by royal patronage, the official worship of the national God 
centred in Jerusalem. To offset the threatening supremacy of the 
Judahite Temple, the secessionist king Jeroboam, in his separate 
realm of Israel, established at Beth-el and Dan, long sacred by tradi- 
tion, new royal sanctuaries, thus turning to his own designs the drift 
toward centralization. Yet parallel with the official worship of the 
capitals, although the reforms enjoined by the Book of the Law in 
Josiah’s reign set ultimate sanction upon the exclusive legitimacy of 
the Temple at Jezusalem, the popular religion maintained itself till 
the nation perished. 

Religious formalism could not escape the consequences inherent in 
its nature. The spirit of adoration was stifled by the materialism of 
mechanical ceremonial. In time, too, the possession of power brought 
abuse of it, and the priesthood became corrupt. “As they were mul- 
tiplied, so they sinned against me. ... They feed on the sin of my 
people, and set their heart on their iniquity. And it shall be, like peo- 
ple, like priest; and I will punish them for their ways” (Hos. 4 7-9). 
To their personal immorality Isaiah bore witness: they were swallowed 
up by wine and staggered with strong drink; they erred in vision, they 
stumbled in judgment (28 7). In its insistence upon the correct per- 
formance of ritual as the chief requirement of worship, the priestly 
religion failed to apprehend the highest possibilities of Yahweh’s 
character. 

In many religions, both primitive and mature, the dominant figure 

400 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


has been the priest. From shaman or medicine-man, master of tribal 
magic, to the ministers of great imperial temples, versed in all the 
lore won by ages of culture, the customary or the official represent- 
atives of religion have been the controlling, guiding power over the 
wills and minds of their people. It was not so in Israel. Here were 
persons quite outside the sacred guilds, who had far more significance 
than the priests for the progress of religion. Deborah, rousing the 
tribes to fresh enthusiasm for their mighty God of war; Samuel, a 
seer and man of God, but not a priest as later writers characterized 
him; the roving ecstatics, proclaiming Yahweh’s cause; David, 
Solomon, and other monarchs; then the counsellors, styled prophets, 
of the kings; and strange terrific men of action like Elijah and Elisha, 
constituting a long line of heroic personalities which culminated in 
the great prophets: — these, more than any priests, shaped the course 
of Israel as the chosen people of Yahweh. In the Judahite and 
Ephraimite narratives picturing the early days, priests play a minor 
part. They are not mentioned at all in the Book of Judges, except in 
the supplementary episodes, beginning with chapter 17. The adven- 
turer David, zealous servant of Yahweh, used the priests to consult 
the oracle for his own purposes. King Solomon appointed and re- 
moved priests at his pleasure. Throughout the history of the two 
kingdoms, they were but royal officials, subject to the king’s will. 
Only by exception, it would seem, had they a hand in politics. So 
Zadok, appointed a priest by David, was party to the intrigue that 
raised Solomon to the throne. And Jehoiada, brother-in-law of the 
murdered king Ahaziah of Judah, was prime mover in the conspiracy 
which deposed Queen Athaliah, sending her to her death, and which 
made the boy Jehoash king. The Jewish priesthood attained its com- 
manding position only after the overthrow of the state, when the 
national kingdom gave place to a theocracy ruled by hierarchs. 
401 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria had their priests, cunning, ambitious, 
arrogant. Israel had its single-minded prophets. With the prophets 
and not the priests, in the centuries between the wilderness and the 
Exile, lay the fate of the religion of Yahweh. 


It was of the essence of Israel’s faith that Yahweh was its one and 
only God. Yet the worship of Yahweh, throughout its whole prog- 
ress, had to contend unceasingly against alien beliefs and practices. 

Settled in Canaan, the people were unable to distinguish, except 
by name, the God known to their fathers from the local baals of the 
village communities. The contest between Yahweh and the native 
divinities of the soil continued in the countryside till the end. 

The national worship, as it was constituted at the capital, was 
menaced in its turn, when the Hebrew kingdom opened to contacts 
with other nations. Solomon loved many foreign women. Though 
himself faithful to Israel’s God, yet with a magnificent gesture, as 
suited a grand potentate, he built a shrine for Chemosh of Moab and 
for Milcom of Ammon; and so did he in the interest of all his foreign 
wives, who burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods. As these 
modes of worship, however, introduced for the immediate personal 
benefit of the royal wives, were limited in scope, probably their ex- 
ample was not of far-reaching influence. 

With Ahab’s queen, the Sidonian Jezebel, the case was different. 
A great temple erected at Samaria in honor of the Pheenician god, 
Baal-Melkart, imposingly a symbol and a challenge, brought to a 
public definite issue the contest between the apostates who acknow]- 
edged the power of alien gods and the champions of Yahweh, led by 
Elijah. The teaching of the prophet was given practical effect by the 
violent reforms of Jehu, who massacred all the priests, prophets, and 
worshippers of Baal. But the triumph of Yahweh was neither com- 

402 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


plete nor final. A century later, Hosea still found the worship of the 
baals so prevalent in the northern kingdom as to require passionate 
denunciation. 

The seductive forces which drew the people from their loyalty to 
Yahweh were too strong to be overcome entirely. As the worship of 
the baals allowed a greater abandon than the cult of the austere 
Yahweh, so the same allurements moved the Israelites to the accept- 
ance of foreign deities. The relation had besides a political import; 
for the power that a nation wielded was the measure of the power of 
its gods. If Phoenicia was rich and Israel poor, if Assyria conquered 
the world and Israel succumbed, was not the good fortune of these 
nations due to the superior efficacy of their gods? So Israel might 
argue; and the way to apostasy opened ever invitingly. 

When Samaria fell, the future of Yahweh was committed to the 
southern kingdom. Until now the temptations to foreign modes of 
worship had been less compelling in Judah than in the north. The 
meagre yield of its pasture lands, its comparative aloofness from 
other nations, the unbroken succession of David’s line, the prestige 
of the Temple, offered fewer incitements to change and waywardness. 
For a brief moment, Queen Athaliah, daughter of the Phoenician 
Jezebel, established the cult of the Sidonian Baal in Jerusalem; but a 
revolution carried through by the Temple priesthood destroyed the 
alien queen and all her works. When Judah came into closer con- 
tact with Assyria, the example of the sovereign empire, no less than 
its military prowess, proved irresistible. The altar of Assyrian pat- 
tern which Ahaz caused to be erected at Jerusalem was probably but 
one instance of extensive innovations. When the king “made his 
son to pass through the fire,’ he gave royal sanction to an old and 
widespread custom. Child-sacrifice was prevalent among the 
Canaanites and Phoenicians; it had not been unknown in Israel. Now 

403 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


it received new impetus and currency by the king’s indulgence to- 
ward all manner of heathen rites. His passion for things Assyrian 
was especially intense. A willing vassal of the Empire, he was grate- 
ful for its help against his enemies Samaria and Damascus, and 
emulous to catch for his own small domain so much as a reflection of 
the glory of Ashur which held the world in awe. With the enthusiasm 
of a convert, Ahaz introduced the worship of the sun, moon, 
and stars, which figured impressively from of old in the religions 
of the East. In Judah, it was a novelty, and correspondingly 
enticing. 

Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, proved more responsive to prophetic se- 
verities. As a notable rebuke to idolatry, which his father had so 
flagrantly quickened, he broke in pieces the brazen serpent in the 
Temple, indeed hallowed by traditions of Moses, but now an object 
of illicit worship on the part of a people whose God suffered no image 
to receive adoration due to himself alone. 

Despite the prophets and well-intentioned kings, the recurrent 
tendency to license was not to be suppressed. And in the reign of 
Hezekiah’s son Manasseh, it issued in a total abandonment to all 
evil practices. Jerusalem itself had been spared by the Assyrians, 
but Judah remained a vassal state. The star of the eastern empire 
blazed in the heavens; the dread of its cruel majesty was upon all the 
earth. Its vanquishing armies, ever on the march, were thrusting at 
the heart of Egypt. Mighty were the gods of Assyria. Such may 
have been the mood of Manasseh when he gave rein to the surging 
discontent of the nation. In reaction against the austerity of pro- 
phetic teaching, the king profaned the very Temple, raising there a 
pole and rearing altars for Baal and for the host of heaven. He made 
his son to pass through the fire. Like the Assyrians he practised au- 
gury and used enchantments; and like the ignorant peasants, he dealt 

404 


YAHWEH AND HIS PEOPLE 


with them that had familiar spirits and with wizards. The regression 
was complete. 


Unfaithful the Israelites may have been, but they were not faith- 
less. On the contrary, religion, in one or another aspect of it, wholly 
dominated mind and emotion. All their activities whatsoever were 
impelled by energies or attended by consequences little understood 
but felt to be divine. Signally and in a measure that distinguished 
the Israelites from other peoples, religion was the essence and urge of 
their national culture, impregnating all their serious interests and 
irradiating their lighter hours with its gleam. Their life, limited in 
scale, narrow of outlook, was not highly colored nor complex, as was 
the life of the Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Cretans, the Greeks. 
They had no splendid architecture, no colossal or refined sculpture, 
no drama, no craft to fashion beautiful things; out of their ritual 
unfolded no art. Such little magnificence as they attained in brief 
passage shone from the royal court at Jerusalem or Samaria, but 
hardly penetrated the smaller cities or outlying country. All color- 
ful pomp of great occasions converged upon the sanctuaries and 
finally centred in the Temple ceremonial. The people’s holidays 
were the holy days; their simple pleasures culminated in the joyous- 
ness of their religious festivals. Not lack of religion afflicted the Is- 
raelites, but rather excess of zeal, the while that their conception of 
deity and their modes of worship tended in wrong directions. Their 
experience in the large disclosed that religiousness may not be right- 
eousness; ritual need not implicate morality. 

People and priests alike missed the way. 

But another current of thought and feeling ran deep, if not broad 
in Israel. 


XVIII 
THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


YAHWEH survived, gained majesty and dominion, won expanding 
moral character, and attained spirituality. The tribal God of the 
wilderness triumphed over the Canaanite baals, and became the 
national God of Israel. The Hebrew kingdom was rent apart: and 
the two small states went their feeble divided course to extinction 
and exile. While his people sank to ruin, Yahweh rose to ever new 
supremacy, as greater than all other gods, as finally the sole Ruler 
of the world. 

The continuity was never wholly broken. From the beginning 
through the centuries, against all pressure of alien influences the re- 
ligion founded by Moses maintained its germinal integrity. The 
oldest survivals of Hebrew literature, contemporary with events and 
genuinely historical, the Song of Deborah and the crystal narrative 
of David’s career, hold the record of Israel’s simple loyal faith in 
Yahweh. 

The earliest legislation, the Book of the Covenant, compiled in the 
reign of Solomon from old material, clearly implied a recognition of 
God’s will as moral. Yahweh’s people should have pity on the poor 
and helpless, for Yahweh himself was pitiful; when the poor man 
cried unto him, he would hear, for he was gracious. The Israelice 
should protect and not oppress the stranger-sojourner; and he should 
show kindness even to an enemy. As judgment proceeded from 
Yahweh, who was just, so the administering of justice must be 
scrupulously pure; the witness should not testify falsely, nor the 
judge accept a bribe. These precepts were more than the compul- 

406 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


sions imposed by mere custom. They were ordained by Yahweh; 
and he commanded them because he was merciful and righteous in 
his own nature. Since law was the formulation of God’s will, so 
therefore the humane demands of pity and kindness, the require- 
ment of rectitude, exacted by Israel’s legislation, deriving from con- 
siderations of morality, were the expression of Yahweh’s moral char- 
acter. And thus early was conduct prompted and guided by religion. 

The great narratives had for their inspiration and purpose to set 
forth the election of Israel to a mission dominantly religious. Pre- 
serving traces of elder beliefs, yet they interpret the traditions ac- 
cording to the ideas of their own times. Successively they reflect the 
enlarging conception of Yahweh’s power and nature. 

In the Judahite narrative, composed within a century after Sol- 
omon’s reign, Yahweh appears as the maker of heaven and earth, 
the fashioner of vegetation, beasts and birds, and of mankind. He is 
not a force or object deified, like the gods of Egypt and Babylonia. 
He does indeed manifest himself in natural phenomena, but he is not 
identified with them; rather he is felt to be their creative cause. 
Personalized, for the mind could figure God only as a person, yet 
Yahweh is far exalted above men. Direfully just, but benevolent, 
ruler of the lives of men, he orders all their doings; and yet he talks 
with them in familiar wise. Other peoples in fear and blind awe 
bowed down to the likeness of their gods: reverently the Judahite 
narrator limns the immediacy of Israel’s converse with Yahweh 
himself. 

A century later the Ephraimite narrative shows a refinement of 
conception. Yahweh is now more remotely exalted. He reveals him- 
self, not in his own person, but in dreams and visions; or he sends his 
angel-messengers: he works by supernatural means, less by human 
agency, and more by intervention from above. As to conduct, this 

407 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


narrative evinces a more sensitive conscience. God has become more : 
nearly spiritualized and more moral. So in its turn, despite the way- 
wardness of the people and the materialism of the priests, the 
Ephraimite history maintains the continuity of the purer religion, and 
marks a stage of progress. It prepares the way for the coming of the 
great prophets; and in the period between the two narratives had 
appeared Elijah. 

Abrupt, seemingly single, Elijah carried forward the true tradi- 
tion, as he reaffirmed with terrific emphasis its basic maxims: Yah- 
weh the sole God of Israel; Yahweh a God of justice. The question 
that he propounded with such dramatic vivid trenchancy, Baal or 
Yahweh, who is God? was answered decisively in a manner whose 
import the whole people could not mistake. Whatever its immediate 
consequences for Israel’s practice, it served to define anew with in- 
tense clarity the distinctive relation of Yahweh to his people. Is- 
rael’s God would suffer no other god by his side. Other gods might 
exist for their own peoples. But Israel’s worship, due only to Yah- 
weh, must be paid to him alone. With no less resounding finality, 
Elijah’s rebuke of the king in the matter of Naboth’s vineyard voiced 
the righteousness of Yahweh and denoted the requirements laid upon 
his worshippers by a God whose will was justice. 

In the contest with alien deities, crucial for the future of the true 
religion, the cause of Yahweh received effective though violent im- 
petus from the army captain Jehu. An adventurer pursuing his own 
ends, yet he was countenanced by Elijah’s disciple, the prophet 
Elisha. Making himself king by the unconscionable slaughter of the 
whole royal family, Jehu thereupon exterminated all the adherents 
of Baal. The methods of the self-seeking zealot would seem to have 
been contrary to the will of a righteous God, even though the mur- 


derous acts were performed nominally in his service. According to 
408 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


the narrative, he had the approval of Yahweh. It is significant of the 
progress of Israel’s religion that a century later Hosea condemned 
the massacre. But for the moment at least, Jehu’s political triumph 
restored Yahweh’s primacy. 

Salient from the turmoil of these perilous times, yet Elijah, Elisha, 
Jehu were not the only champions of Yahweh. To the elder prophet, 
appallingly alone in the cave at Horeb whither he had fled for his 
life from Jezebel’s vengeance, Yahweh announced that after the 
destruction of his enemies by Jehu and Elisha, there should be left in 
Israel seven thousand faithful, all the knees that had not bowed to 
Baal, and every mouth that had not kissed him. Hidden from the 
queen’s persecution during Ahab’s reign were a hundred prophets of 
Yahweh. To Elisha rallied fifty of the sons of the prophets. And in 
eminent opposition to about four hundred popular prophets stood 
Micaiah, son of Imlah, who in pronouncing doom upon the king 
anticipated Amos. 

Moreover, Jehu, as though to reénforce his enterprise and lend it 
sanction, coerced to his support the leader of the Rechabites. On his 
bloody way to Samaria, the rebel captain lighted on Jehonadab. 
“And he saluted him. ... And he gave him his hand; and he took 
him up to him into the chariot. And he said, Come with me, and see 
my zeal for Yahweh.” Thus Jehonadab enters the narrative as a 
figure well known in Israel. It transpires that the Rechabites were an 
embodied protest against the popular loose worship. In their view, 
the ill plight of Yahweh was due to the evils attendant upon settled 
life in Canaan. Striving to remain true to the God of the fathers, 
they would build no houses, but dwelt in tents; they would not sow 
seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any; and they would drink no 
wine. By their manner of living, they pleaded for a return to the 
faith of the good old days, when the Hebrews were wanderers in the 

409 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


wilderness and worshipped Yahweh in all simplicity. Doubtless their 
example counted in maintaining, though precariously, the true tradi- 
tion. After the overthrow of the northern kingdom, they dwelt in 
Judah; and more than a century later, when the armies of Nebucha- 
drezzar were threatening the country, they took refuge in Jerusalem. 
in that late day Jeremiah cited the Rechabites’ fidelity to the pre- 
cepts of their order as a rebuke to the fickleness of the people. They 
had played their part loyally, and not wholly without effect. 

The religion of Yahweh was carried forward by individuals or 
little groups, apparently against the drift of people, priests, and 
kings. Surely the kings did not forswear their allegiance to Yahweh; 
but by their toleration of the deities of other peoples in political or 
cultural relations with Israel, they impaired his supreme majesty. 
And yet there was always some response to the higher teaching. The 
Judahite and the Ephraimite narrators could not have been alto- 
gether singular and apart from any current of feeling within the na- 
tion. They wrought creatively, indeed; but the material which they 
transmuted to splendor was already at hand. Their illumined piety 
must have caught some reflection of a glowing warmth of national 
emotion and eager faith. Likewise the doctrine of the prophets, 
themselves isolate and their words seeming to ring unheeded, was 
not suffered to perish utterly. Some hearers were concerned to pre- 
serve their addresses in written form to the use and profit of genera- 
tions to come. Shortly after Amos and Hosea spoke in Israel, the 
northern kingdom was swept away. Descendants of the north Is- 
raelites were the Samaritans; and it is suggestive of the complete 
ruin of the state that the Samaritan scriptures do not include the 
books of Amos and Hosea. But when the nation was dispersed 
throughout the Assyrian empire and lost, at least a few of its citizens 
probably, as certainly did the Rechabites, fled into Judah and to 

410 ; 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


Jerusalem. Among them, it may be supposed, were the bearers of 
the two prophetic books. Perhaps they were priests, for these, as 
learned men, might have aided in committing the discourses to writ- 
ing; and not all priests were necessarily antagonistic to prophecy, as 
witness the priest-prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel. How numerous 
among all the people were the strictly loyal adherents of the true 
religion can only be surmised. 


Therefore, wide and urgent as was wayward Israel’s secular need 
of guidance, the nation had not entirely lacked counsellors by word 
or by example. And so in their turn, the great prophets were not 
quite a sudden, inexplicable apparition. It fell to them not to initi- 
ate but to enlarge, not to change in essence but to exalt and refine. 
They had not to prove, even fer their errant people, the existence of 
Yahweh, but rather to declare, though in newly enhancing terms, 
what manner of God he was and what he required. 

Yahweh was a God of revelation. Unlike other deities, creatures 
of their worshippers, Yahweh rose not into being in a form and ves- 
ture imagined of primordial mythology. Yahweh was, from the be- 
ginning, — self-created; he was cause. And from the beginning he 
revealed himself, by his own acts, in the happenings of men’s lives, 
and by the mouth of his prophets. Though his people strayed from 
him, Yahweh was constant, and his revelation was continuous. 

As cause of all things and self-revealing, Yahweh was a God of his- 
tory. Israel was ever acutely conscious of its origins. The relation- 
ship between Yahweh and his people was not a relationship of nature, 
intrinsic, compelled by inevitable necessity, and immemorial. By his 
own free act Yahweh chose Israel at a single historic moment. And 
Israel’s fortunes were the varied record of Yahweh’s dispensation. 

So much was Israel’s common cherished belief down the centuries. 

All 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


In the life of the nation, the continuing being of Yahweh, who cease- 
lessly revealed himself, was realized historically, — so far as con- 
cerned Israel: Then the great prophets took a step beyond. Yahweh 
was ruler not only of Israel but of all peoples. As he brought Israel 
out of Egypt, so he also brought the Philistines from Caphtor and 
the Arameans from Kir. As he would punish Israel, so too would he 
punish the Arameans, the Philistines, and Ammon and Moab. The 
teaching of Amos was extended by Isaiah. ‘Ho Assyrian, the rod of 
mine anger, the staff in whose hand is mine indignation!’’ Yahweh 
would stir up the Egyptians against the Egyptians. He had stretched 
out his hand over the sea, he had shaken the kingdoms. All peoples 
were but instruments, which Yahweh used for his own designs. A 
century later Jeremiah was charged to speak to the peoples that sent 
messengers seeking alliance with Judah: “Thus saith Yahweh of 
hosts, the God of Israel, I have made the earth, the men and the 
beasts that are upon the face of the earth; and I give it unto whom it 
seemeth right unto me.”’ The God of Israel’s history was the master 
of all history. 

Since Yahweh, as a God of history, had existed continuously from 
out of the past and operated ever creatively, controllingly, in the 
present, so he had a future. And this, as the prophets came to see, 
was independent of the particular fortunes, whether good or bad, 
of his worshippers. The elevation of Yahweh to sovereignty over the 
whole earth relaxed the old exclusive national bond between him and 
his chosen people. It was the nation’s deepest conviction, established 
at the beginning and intensified with the centuries, that Yahweh and 
Israel were linked indissolubly in a common fate: their dependence 
was reciprocal and equally conditioned. Every people had its god; 
and conversely, a god without a people was unthinkable. Now in 
crashing sentences of doom, Amos announced that Yahweh would 

412 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


even destroy his own very people. Though indeed chosen, Israel was 
but one among the nations. “ Are ye not as the children of the Ethio- 
pians unto me, O children of Israel? saith Yahweh.’ Yahweh did 
not need Israel, — a bitter lesson, so subversive of old beliefs. 

And in the swift course of material disasters, as the prophets rose 
to the conception of God increasingly as a moral and spiritual being, 
Yahweh was released from the constraints of the covenant binding 
him to Israel, and thus he was enabled to survive, as no other god 
survived, the destruction of his nation. The fortunes of other national 
gods marched with the fortunes of their people. They waxed with 
their worshippers’ increment of might, and waned with their decline. 
The gods gained worldly majesty by territorial conquest. Not so Yah- 
weh. Other nations, more powerful in numbers and in arms, subju- 
gated puny Israel. But Yahweh triumphed over their gods, and lived 
on after these had perished. The problem thrust upon the prophets 
was this: If Israel is weaker than other nations, how can Yahweh be 
greater than their gods? The problem was forced by the pressure of 
outer circumstances; the more urgent it became, the nearer and more 
terribly ruin impended, so much the stronger became the prophets’ 
reasonable faith. The solution lay elsewhere than in the physical. 
Yahweh's relation to his people was different from that of other gods 
to their worshippers. He was superior to them in essence and in char- 
acter. His power was not in trampling legions and the holocausts of 
innumerable suppliants. He was supreme in righteousness; and his 
moral law, imperative not only upon Israel but upon the whole earth, 
must prevail over all material might. Indeed, the very overthrow of 
his nation was a triumph of his justice. Not by world conquest, but 
by virtue of his own nature, Yahweh attained highest elevation and 
broadest sovereignty. 

Though the prophets conceived Yahweh thus greatly, they still 

413 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


clung with passionate intensity to the old thought of him as in a 
special and wonderful sense the God of Israel, but they filled the 
thought with new content and charged it with richer implications. 
By Amos, indeed, the bond between Yahweh and Israel was trans- 
muted. It was not, as the people believed, physical nor sacrosanct 
and inviolable: it would be loosed in punishment of the nation’s sins; 
it could only be maintained by Israel’s deserving. Micah’s view was 
limited: though Yahweh came down to tread upon the high places of 
the earth, he was concerned solely for his own people; but yet the 
prophet announced boldly that Jerusalem should be destroyed. For 
Hosea, the bond was peculiarly close: in establishing and maintain- 
ing it, Yahweh was actuated by love; and he required an equal love in 
return. With Isaiah and Jeremiah, in more exalted and more inti- 
mate wise, Yahweh was the God of Israel: but neither stopped just 
there. For Isaiah, the national God, exceeding effulgent in glory, 
supreme in majesty, was Israel’s Holy One. Notwithstanding this 
concept, superlative in exaltation and refinement, Isaiah proclaimed 
that although Judah were overwhelmed, Jerusalem would remain 
inviolate as Yahweh’s dwelling place. There followed a protracted 
reign of apostasy and utter license. Yet with no prophet was Yahweh 
closer to his worshippers than with Jeremiah. But he announced that 
the very Temple itself should be destroyed. For Yahweh was no 
longer bound to his people, his land, his city. Yahweh was God in a 
sense sublimer and more spiritual. In the measure that the prophets 
transcended the traditional particularistic idea of Yahweh’s relation 
to Israel, they made it possible for the national God to become 
universal. 


Most broadly basic in the appeal of the prophets was their refer- 
ence to Yahweh’s righteousness. 
414 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


In origin, morality is but custom. It is religious in content only 
to the extent that all life is implicated with forces beyond human. 
Morality is communal sanction, and that sanction stands under the 
approval and protection of the god. Right and wrong, virtue and 
sin, are collective; they are that which is helpful or injurious to the 
group. Primitive morality does not reckon with the personal char- 
acter or inner motives of the individual; it is concerned only with 
overt acts. 

Israel’s teachers lifted morality to another level. Not custom, as 
of old, not the compulsions by the group for its own safeguarding, 
morality was determined by the requirements of God. Wrong and 
sin were the breach and default of Yahweh’s commands; right and 
virtue followed upon obedience to his will. 

The prophets achieved their conviction of Yahweh’s righteousness 
not wholly by direct inspiration; they were forced to it by reasoning, 
as they sought to interpret their world. Israel had no belief in the 
continuance of life beyond the grave. At death, the soul went down, 
feeble, shadowy, into Sheol, a vague region of darkness underground, 
without distinction of estate, without penalty or reward, a place of 
complete deprivation. Utterly to be deplored was the cessation of 
life, the end of man. The individual had no future. Only for Israel 
as a people was there a future, and it was of this earth: hence the ex- 
pectation of the Day of Yahweh; hence, as the nation plunged to 
destruction, the eager longing for the Messiah, a glorious king of 
David’s line who should rule on earth in power and perfectness. 
Therefore life of the present must be explained in its own terms. A 
moment may be interpreted only by its relation to something outside 
itself. For explanation of the world as Israel knew it, a world of in- 
equalities and iniquities, of impending ruin of the state, the great 
prophets made reference to Yahweh and his purposes. Assuming 

Al5 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


the existence of God absolutely, as a fact not questioned, they sought 
in him and only in him the necessary conditions of human life. Yah- 
weh was, must be, a God of justice, of righteousness. Therefore the 
miseries here and now were his punishment of the nation’s sins. Let 
the people return to Yahweh understandingly. Salvation of the 
present in the present rested with God. 

Not only exalted in righteousness, Yahweh was also of finer es- 
sence than other gods. Always and to the end, other nations imag- 
ined their gods humanly, and as physical power. So Israel too at 
first. Then as Yahweh was enhanced in moral character, Israel’s 
concept of God tended to become spiritualized. Though the Hebrew 
people never attained the idea of complete immateriality, yet in the 
progress of Israel’s thought, God became less material, less merely 
human, and more etherealized, divine more purely. 

In the old days, the “‘spirit,’”’ or breath, of Yahweh was believed to 
be a bodily force. It came mightily upon Gideon, Jephthah, Samson. 
The ecstatics were seized by it. Upon Saul it came mightily, inspir- 
ing him to prophesy, quickening him to an impetuous deed; later, the 
spirit of Yahweh departed from him, and an evil spirit from Yahweh 
troubled him. Illustrative of the physical nature of such a spirit is 
the instance cited by the prophet Micaiah to King Ahab before the 
battle. A vision showed him Yahweh sitting on his throne, and all 
the host of heaven standing by him. 


And Yahweh said, Who shall entice Ahab, that he may go up and 
fall at Ramoth-gilead? ... And there came forth a spirit, and stood 
before Yahweh, and said, I will entice him. And Yahweh said unto 
him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit 
in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt entice him, 
and shalt prevail also: go forth, and do so. Now therefore, behold, 
Yahweh hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets. 


Not by this way was Yahweh conceived spiritually. 
416 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


In refining the conception of Yahweh as a spiritual being, the 
prophets drew a practical lesson from Israel’s attitude toward the 
use of images in worship. All other nations represented their gods in 
material forms. Israel followed a different course. In the desert, it 
may be fancied, there was no need of images: the object of worship 
was itself there; the moving moon, a solitary tree, a great stone, a 
precious spring of water, these were the abode of deity or the deity’s 
very self. Besides, the wanderers lacked skill and implements to 
fashion substances at hand into shapes of meaning. 

To the Hebrews, Yahweh might indeed be manifested in things: he 
revealed himself in fire and cloud and earthquake; as they pressed 
forward to the conquest of the promised land, a sacred chest certified 
the presence of the God of battles with his army. Here phenomenon 
or object was but a manifestation of the divine; it was not Yahweh 
himself nor an image of him. And Israel never personified the proc- 
esses of nature. Yahweh was not thing; he was cause. To the extent 
that he showed himself to men in sensible form, his presence was 
designated as his “‘face”’ or his “glory.” His being was his “name.” 
These phases are more abstract, less material, than an image of 
stone, wood, metal. 

In Canaan the newcomers took possession of the ancient shrines, 
which were furnished with objects bodying forth the immediateness 
of the deity to his worshippers. But the practices associated with the 
shrines led Israel astray, so that the people, though unwittingly, for- 
sook Yahweh to bow before the baals. These modes of worship, how- 
ever, were regarded as legitimate, for the people still supposed them- 
selves loyal to Yahweh; they did not yet know his true nature. Even 
Elijah, in his victorious assault upon the Phoenician Baal, spoke no 
word condemning images. 

It was the great prophets who first realized that the objects taken 

417 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


over from Canaanite usage were accessory to the worship of false 
gods. Hosea scornfully exposed the popular delusions. “‘He hath 
cast off thy calf [contemptuously for bull], O Samaria; mine anger is 
kindled against them.” Isaiah charged, as one count in his indict- 
ment, that the land was full of idols; and conformably with his teach- 
ing, King Hezekiah broke in pieces the brazen serpent in the Temple. 
Expressive of the prophetic doctrine, the Ten Words enjoined: 
“Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor the likeness of 
any form that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or 
that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself 
unto them, nor serve them.”” Most sweeping polemic against idola- 
trous worship was launched in ordinances of the Book of the Law. 
Israel must break down the altars of the Canaanites, and dash in 
pieces their pillars, and burn their Asherim with fire, and hew down 
the graven images of their gods. 

It may be doubted if the objects used in worship were intended or 
believed to be a likeness of Yahweh’s form. Israel had little plastic 
cunning, and probably at best its images were clumsily wrought or 
rudely carved. The pillar and the post, set up at the shrines, embod- 
ied the divinity that from of old was felt to inhere in stones and trees. 
The teraphim may have been images, large or small, of household 
gods, particular with each family. The bulls adored in the northern 
kingdom symbolized strength and procreative power, attributes 
which, originally imputed to Canaanite deities, were ascribed to 
mighty and bounteous Yahweh: they need not have been mistaken 
for Yahweh himself, since an object employed as a symbol is not nec- 
essarily a representative likeness, but may be merely the visible 
expression of anidea. Of the brazen serpent in the Temple, the origin, 
history, and significance are altogether obscure. The Pesel, or graven 
image, such as the Ten Words forbade, may or may not have been 

418 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


of human form. Yet with the widest construction of these uncer- 
tainties, Israel had nothing at all comparable with the Egyptian and 
Babylonian elaborate effigies of the gods. The prophets denounced 
the use of images in Israel because they were associated with the 
worship of other deities and hence false to Yahweh; moreover, the 
God of Israel, as the prophets apprehended him, was too sublime to 
be degraded to material representation. 

Conceived with ever rarer refinement as a spiritual being, still 
Yahweh remained transcendent, external. In other religions, the 
gods who were personifications of nature powers were immanent in 
things. In Israel’s religion there was never latent the drift toward 
pantheism. Lifted above nature, Yahweh was outside the world that 
he had made. Those who won closest access gained direct commun- 
ion with him, but they experienced no mystical union. The ecstasy 
of the enthusiasts was physical and psychic rather than religious. 
The great prophets saw Yahweh in visions, they spoke with him and 
heard his voice, they felt themselves possessed and compelled by his 
spirit as by a force: “‘ Yahweh spake thus to me with a strong hand.” 
They were his instruments. But there was no sense of identity and 
fusion, no merging and release of distinctive personality; the spokes- 
men of Yahweh rested apart as individuals. For them, knowledge of 
God was not indeed a speculative or intellectual notion of his essence, 
nor yet was it the absorption of the separate self in the supreme 
Being or absolute Self of the universe: knowledge of God was the 
practical understanding of his will; hence the prophetic emphasis 
upon conduct. God was outside of man, controlling his welfare from 
beyond, imposing requirements upon him from above. The prophets 
of Israel did not reach the ultimate spiritualizing of divinity. But of 
a God who remained transcendent, they won, among contemporary 
peoples, the noblest conception. 

419 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


The religion of Israel differed from the religions of other peoples 
notably in two respects; and these were differences not so much of 
degree as of kind: the differences consisted in the character of Israel’s 
God and in the order of demand that Yahweh laid upon his wor- 
shippers. 

All nations conceived their gods as power, though its exercise were 
capricious, subject to no control. Likewise the prophets of Israel 
endowed Yahweh with plenary might. So Amos taught that Yahweh 
caused it to rain upon one city, and he caused it not to rain upon 
another city. He sent pestilence and war, and overthrew cities, 
“Shall evil befall a city, and Yahweh hath not done it!’’ Universal 
Cause, his power as ruler of nature and sovereign Lord of men 
ranged from heaven to the underworld of the dead, from the moun- 
tain top to the bottom of the sea. For Isaiah, earth’s peoples were 
servant to Yahweh’s hand. And to Jeremiah he committed the cup 
of the wine of wrath, to cause all the nations to drink it. But not 
only was Yahweh power; also — and herein was he greater than 
other gods — he was purpose. “As I have thought, so shall it come 
to pass, and as I have purposed, so shall it stand.”” Thus Isaiah 
brought into certain definition the idea of Providence, God’s wisdom 
and might overruling. 

Radiant of his power was Yahweh’s dreadful majesty. The whole 
earth was full of his glory. So overwhelming and cataclysmic was his 
being that men should go into the caves of the rock and into the 
holes of the dust from before the terror of Yahweh and from the 
glory of his majesty, when he arose to shake mightily the earth. 
But more dreadful even than Yahweh’s majesty was his holiness. 
To Isaiah at the moment of his call, Yahweh revealed himself as 
thrice holy, and in a new sense. Other gods, and Yahweh too at 
times in the early days, might not be approached without due pre- 

420 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


caution, on pain of disaster to the heedless one; their holiness, in- 
herent in their divinity, was but physical. Now Yahweh was awe- 
some, terrific, because of his moral and spiritual sublimity. And the 
apostrophe of Habakkuk drew upon this higher implication of 
holiness. 

Art thou not from of old, O Yahweh my God, my Holy One! 

Thou that art of purer eyes than to behold evil, 

And that canst not look on perverseness. 

The greatness of Yahweh, however, — his governance of nature, 
his authority over the nations — was less distinctive than the qual- 
ities attributed to his character. Every people imputed the maxi- 
mum of power to its chief god; and he was himself, or there was 
ranged with him, a god who watched over justice. Amen-Ra, Marduk, 
Ashur were superlative might; Osiris, Shamash were guardians of 
law. But no other nation than Israel heard the divine voice, saying, 
“Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with 
loving-kindness have I drawn thee.” Only Israel endued God — as 
himself their source — with righteousness, which was more than 
sheer justice, with loving-kindness, and with tender mercy. 

As a God of justice, Yahweh was indeed stern, avenging; but he 
was not inexorable. He would pity and pardon. Though men’s sins 
were as scarlet, they should be white as snow; though they were red 
like crimson, they should be as wool. Sublimely exalted in holiness, 
yet Yahweh was very near his worshippers. Other gods were the be- 
getters of their people. Yahweh was a faithful husband; a compas- 
sionate, wistful father, not merely in the traditional physical sense. 
The relationship was charged with emotion. Other gods were aloof, 
severe, immobile. Yahweh came down with pleading. His heart 
yearned for his dear son, he would surely have mercy upon him. “Ye 
shall call me, my Father, and shall not turn away from following me.” 

421 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


In theory Israel’s sole God from the beginning, Yahweh became 
actually unique by virtue of his character. His relation to other gods 
had to be determined with the centuries. Whether Israel before the 
Exile reached the concept of Yahweh as supreme and universal to 
the complete negation of all other gods is less significant than the 
fact that its great teachers proclaimed Yahweh as sole and unique 
even for Israel, with new emphasis and cumulative content. Of the 
primary dogma the practical consequences were wide. The exclusive 
worship of Yahweh gave Israel from the first its cohesion as a people; 
and to the particularity of its religion was due this people’s constant 
sense of difference, which grew ever more intolerant. Conversely, 
infidelity to Yahweh was treason against the nation, for it involved 
Israel’s unfaithfulness to itself. Moreover the oneness of Yahweh 
saved Israel’s religion from becoming lost in syncretism. For though 
this religion was exclusive by intention, it was not isolated in fact. 
It absorbed -many elements of Canaanite lore and practice; and en- 
larged by them, it proceeded still integral: further, it was intensified 
by its very contrast and opposition to all other ideas of deity and 
modes of worship. At last the sovereignty of Yahweh over all the 
nations, his sublimity as a moral being, his superlative spiritual 
holiness left no room for other gods. 

With a finality not attained by contemporary nations, Israel 
arrived at the notion of God, the sum of everything divine, as 
distinct from a god, designated by a proper name. Other peoples 
had gods, many, various, of divers qualities and powers, and of. 
differing rank, leading up to a chief god. The outlines were vague: 
one god passed into another; qualities and powers were shared in 
common. Yahweh was supreme, gathering all attributes of divinity 
to himself alone; he was unique, permitting no other gods by his 
side. The God of Israel was Yahweh. But Yahweh was God. 

422 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


Perhaps the prophets themselves were not aware of the full import 
of their teaching. In their own time they gave new meanings to old 
terms: holiness, formerly a physical property of deity, rose into moral 
sublimity; communal right, the justice required by custom, was 
transmuted to righteousness, inspired by high motives and springing 
from a pure self-directed will. The content of prophetic terms and 
teaching was limited to the range of the prophets’ insight, to the 
scope of their religious experience. These were far in advance of 
Israel’s own attainment up to their time; they were immeasurably 
beyond the attainment, then or later, of other nations within Israel’s 
horizon. But even they had still a future. The heights reached by 
the religion of the pre-exilic prophets are not its only title to distinc- 
tion: equally significant was its capability of enrichment and subli- 
mation. In the thought of the same Hebrew people, after the ruin of 
the state, Yahweh, God of Israel, became God supernal and univer- 
sal. True to the great germinal urge in the heart of it, the teaching of 
the prophets flowered supremely in the religion of Jesus. 


To bring the nation to a right understanding of Yahweh, it was 
not enough to declare his nature absolutely. Apprehending the 
complementary aspect of religion, the prophets set forth the demands 
of Yahweh upon his worshippers. 

In primitive society, the group accepted the cultus without ques- 
tion: it was given; it was there, immemorially. The worshippers quite 
simply tried to perform with mechanical correctness the acts im- 
posed by the ritual. The prophets of Israel interpreted religion far 
differently. According to their doctrine, religion was conscious eager 
conformity with Yahweh’s moral will. 

A moral God was not satisfied with sacrifices and offerings. By 
nature, Yahweh was not a being to be swayed by the base appeal of 

423 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


material gifts. He demanded right conduct. To sin, to miss the 
mark, was not, as the people supposed, to commit an error in ritual 
performance: to sin was to offend against Yahweh’s ethical law. As 
the prophets thus freed religion from the external and the material, 
they released emotion and the spirit. 

The prophets’ reiterated condemnation of ritual reveals its im- 
mense importance in the national worship. Unable to propose a 
practical substitute for it, they sought to transform its motive. 
Beyond the stark denial of its efficacy, they affirmed with devastat- 
ing scorn that sacrifice was positively odious, lacking the right intent. 
Sweeping away the familiar, cherished, mechanical supports of re- 
ligion, Israel’s teachers averred the possibility, nay more the neces- 
sity, of choice between two kinds of act, — the one righteous, the 
other iniquitous. Not outer action but inner motive was decisive. 
No longer would gifts purchase Yahweh’s favor; nor would the medi- 
ation of priests bring men to a knowledge of what his character 
cemanded. Of pleasing God truly the responsibility devolved upon 
the individual, as capable of choice. 

Here emerged the individual as a religious person. In elder days, 
the individual had no status apart from his group. Virtue and sin 
were collective. The merits or misdeeds of one returned upon all, 
upon the whole family or the clan. To requite Obed-edom for his 
wardship of the Ark, Yahweh blessed him together with all his house. 
Examples of punishment entailed were the penalties visited upon the 
families of Dathan and Abiram (Num. 16 31, 32) and of Achan (Jos. 
7 24f.), and upon the sons and grandsons of Saul (2 Sam. 21 1-9). 
The principle was expressed for Israel in the saying, ‘“‘The fathers 
have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” 
Toward the end, it was proclaimed, in the Book of the Law, ‘The 
fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the 

424 . 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to 
death for his own sin.”” Meanwhile the prophets had won a new con- 
ception of responsibility. In the main they addressed the whole 
people as a unit.’ But they also noted differences of lot or station, 
the widow, the fatherless, the oppressed, the poor. As the nation 
crumbled in violent dissolution, there issued from the general ruin a 
perception of the meaning and worth of the individual. Isaiah dis- 
cerned the possibility of a remnant which should return. Emphasis 
was transferred from the whole to the one. At last the individual 
stood solely forth as in and of himself liable toward God. Religion 
was charged with profounder obligation. 

Right worship was glad obedience prompted by enlightened will, 
Defining thus the true nature of religion, the prophets declared the 
need of repentance, — a new understanding, a change of intention, a 
different heart. In their own experience, which they made typical of 
_ all right approach to God, they were sorely aware of sin. So Isaiah 
realized in himself the mordant sense of unworthiness and conse- 
quent separation from God. When Yahweh appeared flamingly, to 
summon him to his mission, the prophet cried out in anguish, “ Woe 
is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I 
dwell in the midst of a people with unclean lips.” Poignantly Jere- 
miah too felt the personal bitterness of sin, the wounding of God’s 
love, the grievous pain of one’s own consciousness. ‘The heart is 
deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can 
know it?” 

Sin was the result of heedless ignorance. Hence the necessity to 
know God. To Hosea came the word of Yahweh, “My people are 
destroyed for lack of knowledge.’’ And athwart the yearnings of his 
tenderness smote the clear truth, “I desire goodness and not sacri- 
fice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” When 

425 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


Isaiah confessed before Yahweh the uncleanness of his people, sear- 
ingly terrific was Yahweh’s reply: ‘‘Go, and tell this people, Hear ye 
indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. 
Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and 
shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, 
and understand with their heart, and turn again, and be healed.”’ To 
worship Yahweh aright, Israel must know him aright, must approach 
him with an understanding heart. 

And Yahweh demanded also faith, deeper and truer than of yore. 
In the old days there was no question of simple trust in Yahweh, his 
might, his rule, his benevolence toward his people. Deborah had but 
to sound the call to battle in his name. And David, representative of 
all his fellows, wholly committed his life to Yahweh’s direction. The 
piety that breathed in the great narratives was as complete as it was 
single. With anxious pathos Hosea affirmed for the first time explic- 
itly the inwardness of the religious temper. Isaiah developed the 
theme at length, with appeal to practical reason. The worshippers of 
Yahweh were not lacking in belief and trust: but their belief was 
blind and mistaken; they trusted in the wrong things. They believed 
that Yahweh was bound to protect his own people, and that they 
could gain his favor by petitions and sacrifices. But Yahweh hated 
their oblations of vanity; it was but lip service, traditional and per- 
functory. “This people draw nigh, and with their mouth and with 
their lips do honor me, but have removed their heart far from me, 
and their fear of me is a commandment of men, which hath been 
learned.’”’ But even their accepted teachers and their professional 
wise men had not the truth. “The wisdom of their wise men shall 
perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.” 
On the contrary, “O house of Jacob,” pleaded Isaiah, ‘‘come and let 
us walk in the light of Yahweh!” The people trusted in material 

426 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


forces, in their silver and gold, in their own strength, in alliances 
with other nations, in armies. Vainly. For the Egyptians were men 
and not God, and their horses were flesh and not spirit. “‘ Woe to the 
rebellious children,” saith Yahweh, “that take counsel but not of me; 
and that make a league, but not of my spirit!’’ Not by supernat- 
ural foresight was Isaiah empowered to herald the certain future, but 
by the assurance of his own knowledge of Yahweh and faith in him. 

The faith urged and exemplified by Isaiah was absolute. Another 
kind of faith, but no less religious, was achieved by Habakkuk. Not 
by conviction and affirmation, but by questionings, was he able to 
discern and to declare the manner of divine purposes. Scanningly 
he had thought much about God. As he questioned and watched, at 
length Yahweh answered him. Though the vision tarried, he should 
wait for it. Its time was appointed, it would surely come, it would 
not delay. Though God’s providence were mysterious, he could be 
trusted to effect his designs. In the midst of iniquities, turmoils, and 
confusion of values, the righteous should live by his steadfastness. 
So Habakkuk represented a point of view different from that of his 
fellow prophets, but one perhaps not unknown in those dark days. 
Faith was not granted him by illumination or immediate experience 
of God. He had to win it by the bitter toilsome way of doubt. To 
such as would be loyal to Yahweh, he counselled indomitable trust, 
fidelity, patience, duteous but joyous acceptance of God’s will. 
Herein he attained even a deeper understanding of the true religious 
attitude. 

In its primary manifestations, religion arises out of fear and self- 
interest: the gods are power, patron, king, remote but imminently 
terrible; their power must be propitiated, their indulgent bounty 
purchased. Israel’s prophets taught that religion should spring from 
love. Yahweh chose Israel to be his first-born, his specially favored, 

427 . 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


son, because he loved him. Israel had no female divinity. All tender 
sentiment, of which this people was greatly capable, was concen- 
trated in passionate devotion to the sole God. Yahweh was Israel’s 
husband; with a change of metaphor, but keeping the fervor and 
urge of intense affection, he was Israel’s father. Worship other than 
the true worship was conjugal infidelity and filial ingratitude. There- 
fore the obligations implicated in the relationship were moral. 
Moreover, appeal was made to the deeper and nobler motives, lifted 
out of fear and self-regarding intent, and directed to the conscience 
and the heart. The prophets enjoined love of goodness for its own 
sake, and because goodness was Yahweh’s will. They pleaded for 
love of God, because he was loving, and the highest, worthiest tribute 
man could render him was love. 

Other nations paid homage to their deities, who accepted men’s 
offerings and in return bestowed material benefits. Yahweh was to 
be worshipped best and truly by the doing of his will. But not only 
was he to receive worship as the object of devotion; Jeremiah taught 
that Yahweh was himself the source and inspiration of religion. In 
offering sacrifice to other gods, the people of Judah had but hewn out 
broken cisterns that would hold no water; their homage was vain. 
Yahweh was more than mere recipient: he was a fountain of living 
waters, quickening and sustaining man’s spirit in his intercourse with 
God. 

Not mechanical, inevitable, as with other gods, the relation be- 
tween Yahweh and his worshippers was voluntary and intimately 
personal. Hosea had felt profoundly the need of a different heart and 
the compulsions of love. Notably for Jeremiah religion was com- 
munion. Other prophets uttered the revelation of Yahweh it was 
given them to speak. Jeremiah talked with Yahweh, as a man talks 
with his friend. Other prophets, as instruments of the divine mes- 

428 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


sage, had addressed the people as a whole: for the relationship be- 
tween Yahweh and Israel was corporate; it was tribal, national. Yet 
appeal to the nation as a unit had failed. There was left the individ- 
ual. Jeremiah, by nature self-conscious, sensitive, felt his commis- 
sion by Yahweh to be personal to himself. When his labors aroused 
violent hostility that forced him into isolation keenly realized as 
loneliness, his total failure besides to win the people drove him back 
upon himself as an individual, and led him to question God on his 
own behalf. “‘Righteous art thou, O Yahweh, when I contend with 
thee; yet would I reason the cause with thee.” So Jeremiah entered 
into a new relation with Yahweh, a single, separate soul seeking to 
know God, striving to learn his will anxiously, then ready to obey it. 

In the affections Jeremiah found the way of approach to God. 
“Ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all 
your heart.” The old covenant made with the fathers was indeed 
broken by Israel’s secular infidelity. But Yahweh would make a 
new covenant: “I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their 
heart will I write it.” Not formal worship surely, nor even mere right 
conduct, — religion welled from the heart. This was the prophet’s 
understanding of his relation to God: “Thou, O Yahweh, knowest 
me; thou seest me, and triest my heart toward thee.’ This was the 
charge he brought against his people, that Yahweh was near in their 
mouth, but far from their heart. And this was Yahweh’s supreme 
promise to Israel: “I will give them a heart to know me, that I am 
Yahweh: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God; for 
they shall return unto me with their whole heart.” The soul of man 
is come into lucid consciousness and recognition. Religion is the 
utter devotion of the individual heart to God. 

A voice, nameless but ultimate, echoes the sum and issue of 
prophetic teaching: 

429 a 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


‘““Wherewith shall I come before Yahweh, and bow myself before 
the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with 
calves a year old? Will Yahweh be pleased with thousands of rams, 
with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my first-born for my 
transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He hath 
showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth Yahweh require 
of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with 
thy God?” ! 


When the nation was nearing its precipitate end, the efforts of the 
prophets to constrain the people to the right path were suddenly and 
signally reénforced. Soon after the young Jeremiah was called to his 
task, and while Zephaniah’s wrathful threatenings still resounded, 
there was discovered in the Temple the “Book of the Law.” Com- 
posed probably within the reign of Manasseh, it was inspired by the 
teachings of the prophets of the century before, though their labors 
seemed, in the excesses of apostasy that supervened upon the deliv- 
erance of Jerusalem, to have been frustrate; many-faceted, it mir- 
rors the conditions, the beliefs and aspirations of its time. With a 
continuity that bridged the depths into which the people plunged 
wantonly, the Book of the Law, while it was concerned practically 
with the regulation of the cultus, was in aim penetrated by zeal for 
worship in the true spirit. 

The people had been seduced by usages associated with the old 
Canaanite local shrines and hillside altars. To demolish at one 
stroke the whole basis of these allurements to evil, the Book of the 
Law ordained that legitimate sacrifice must be offered only at the 
altar of the Temple in Jerusalem. Consequent upon this decree 
were changes of detail in praxis, which fell within the purview of the 

1 Ascribed to Micah, 6 6-8. 
430 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


priesthood. But from out the disposition of external forms, as the 
reason for it, mounted to heightened splendor the prophetic doctrine 
of the nature of God. 

Yahweh had chosen Israel, — here is the first use of the precise 
term, though the idea was old — not for any merit on Israel’s part, 
but from the wealth of his own love. Therefore in grateful response 
to his wondrous guidance and care, intended to the discipline and 
betterment of his people, they should keep his statutes, less from fear 
of punishment than from love to Yahweh and the desire to please 
him, as a God who was grieved by their disobedience and wounded 
by their iniquity. Reference was indeed made to self-regarding 
motives: Israel should not go after other gods, “lest the anger of 
Yahweh thy God be kindled against thee, and he destroy thee from 
off the face of the earth”’’: and if Israel would keep his command- 
ments, “he will bless thee and multiply thee; he will also bless the 
fruit of thy body and the fruit of thy ground, thy grain and thy new 
wine and thine oil, the increase of thy cattle and the young of thy 
flock.” Such was the people’s own view of their relation to their 
deity, the notion of due penalty or appropriate reward. And more- 
over, the extremity of the nation’s sins required the utmost of coer- 
cion. The prevailing tenor of the book, however, was the extolment 
of love, and demand on the affections. In the same spirit, the laws 
governing conduct were prompted by humane considerations. God 
moved in kindness; obediently men should be kind in generous love. 

Resuming the doctrines of its prophetic forerunners, but itself 
wrung from the agonies of its own apostate age, the Book of the Law 
expounded anew the nature of Yahweh. His attributes were reaf- 
firmed with a fresh majesty of phrase. Yahweh was God of gods and 
Lord of lords, the great God, the mighty and the terrible, who re- 
garded not persons nor took rewards, executing judgment of the 

431 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


fatherless and the widow, and loving the stranger-sojourner. He was 
a faithful God, who would observe the oath sworn to the fathers; he 
would keep covenant and mercy with them that loved him, but with 
equal justice would he repay them that hated him, to destroy them. 
A fearsome God, but loving as a father, inerrantly righteous but 
graciously merciful, Yahweh was exalted above all flesh. Unto him 
belonged heaven and the heaven of heavens, his holy habitation, and 
the earth with all that therein is. 

Israel’s infidelity and idolatry had been smitingly denounced by 
Hosea and Isaiah. Now the abandon of Manasseh’s reign made 
imperative a new statement of Yahweh’s all-exclusive uniqueness. 
Yahweh was one God, not many like the baals. Yahweh was Israel’s 
only God. In elliptical terms capable of various renderings, all of 
which however reémphasized the great lesson of complete singleness, 
it was proclaimed: ‘‘ Hear, O Israel, Yahweh our God is one Yahweh!”’ 
or, ‘‘ Yahweh is our God, Yahweh alone!”’ Only a God unique could 
become supreme, not merely as the sole ruler of his people exacting 
their whole allegiance, but also as the entirety of attributes that his 
worshippers could conceive. That these attributes reached the high- 
est of moral grandeur and spiritual purity was the distinction of 
Israel’s genius. 

The truth of Yahweh’s sole supremacy established, there followed 
immediately in the Book of the Law the practical injunction: “And 
thou shalt love Yahweh thy God with all thy heart and with all thy 
soul and with all thy might.” Herein worship too attained the 
heights: — the necessity and the privilege to fear God reverently, to 
walk in all his ways, to serve him, and to love him with all the heart 
and soul. 

At once a legal code and a great document in the religious experi- 
ence, the Book of the Law pointed the way to the dual path pursued 

432 


THE FLOWER OF ISRAEL’S GENIUS 


by the Jewish community after the Exile: — the elaboration of a 
meticulous legalism and the eloquent supreme exaltation of Yahweh 
as God spiritual and universal. 


Amazingly in the brief span of hardly six hundred years, Israel 
passed from the acceptance of a god whose habitation was a moun- 
tain in the wilderness, who manifested himself in storm and fire and 
earthquake, to the worship of God, throned in heaven, ruling all the 
earth, a God whose will was righteousness, whose being was love. 
The religions of other nations, when they emerge into historic cog- 
nizance, in the fifth millennium before Christ, were risen out of an 
obscurity of unreckonable antecedent time. Of Egypt, Sumer, Baby- 
lonia, and then Assyria, the religions had arrived at full maturity 
when the tribes who came into history as the Hebrews were still 
wanderers in the desert. Unrelated to the gods of contemporary 
nations, the God of Israel entered Canaan with his worshippers; 
there assailed and beset by alien deities and contrary modes of wor- 
ship along a few critical centuries, Yahweh triumphed, for Israel 
unique, in Israel’s world supreme. No other religion in the ancient 
East at all paralleled the religion of Israel in the rapidity of its un- 
foldment, or ripened to gleam and savor in any wise comparable with 
the glory of its flower and the sublime fulness of its fruit. 

The religion won by Israel was indeed the achievement of great 
men. But these were the paramount exemplars and finest essence of 
their people. Ever characteristic of Israel was the salience of indi- 
viduals, — distinguished not by royal birth or powerful place, but 
eminent by virtue of personality. In primitive society, the individ- 
ual is subordinate to his family or clan. From the nations contem- 
porary with Israel, the names remembered are those of kings and 
conquering generals. Very early, in Israel’s retrospect, and through- 

433 


THE GENIUS OF ISRAEL 


out the people’s history, the course of events was traced by individ- 
uals. Not only princes, counsellors of state, and army commanders 
throng the agitated years, but also popular heroes, adventurers, men 
of God, adroit women, and persons of quite humble station. Lumi- 
nously the authors of the great narratives, though unnamed, were 
regnant personalities. Surgent above all were the prophets, who de- 
clared the progressive revelation of Yahweh. But these men were 
themselves the product of their race. In them were embodied in 
their amplest measure and sovereign degree the qualities that dis- 
tinguished Israel. Their work was conditioned by the nature of the 
people to whom they appealed. The religion they taught, proceeding 
from Israel’s traditional beliefs, defined itself against the background 
of popular practices by contrast and release. Though in their zeal 
for righteousness and purity, they pictured the whole nation as cor- 
rupt, yet the fact that the true religion maintained itself is evidence 
that it evoked response. The material given the prophets’ hand, the 
minds and wills of their people, was wayward and obdurate, yet of a 
. mettle that enabled their achievement. Without their heritage of 
racial character, born in the desert, and wrought by pressure of cir- 
cumstance to a quick, resilient temper, the prophets would not have 
been; without the effectual accord of a people capable of noble con- 
duct and lofty ideals, they would have been but a voice. Their 
labors, if possible at all, had been in vain. Israel brought forth the 
prophets: the prophets led Israel to the heights. 

The genius of Israel, single, intense, consummately religious, came 
to superlative expression in the men who sought to know God, that 
they might do his will. They found God in Yahweh, righteous, just 
but merciful, ready to punish but eager to pardon, exalted but ten- 
derly loving, a mighty God but spiritual, God supreme and eternal. 


INDEXES 


INDEX 


Aaron, 63, 65, 68, 70. 

Abd-ashirta, 28, 93 f. 

Abd-khiba, 28 f., 95 f., 114. 

Abdon, 135. 

Abiathar, 151, 174, 178, 266 n. 

Abiezer, 126 f. 

Abigail, 152 f., 196, 205, 393 f. 

Abihu, 63. 

Abimelech, of Gerar, 7, 13; of Shechem, 
128 ff., 143, 201, 285. 

Abimilki, 29, 98. 

Abiram, 70, 285, 424. 

Abner, 143, 157 ff., 176, 315. 

Abraham, 5, 7,10, 12f., 20f., 24f., 29, 
Boe ant 205, 225 f. 

Abram, 3 

Absalom, 166, re 173 f., 176 ff., 190, 
205, 295 Jaa 

Achan, 424. 

Achish, 154. 

Adad, 98. 

Adadnirari, 242. 

Adapa, 8 

Administration, Moses’, 68; Saul’s, 143; 
David’s, 166. 

Adonijah, 169, 178. 

Agade, 76. 

Agriculture, 192 f. 

Ahab, 214 ff., 228, 242, 332 f. 

Ahaz, 240 f. 

Ahaziah, of Israel, 214; of Judah, 230, 
237, 401. 

Ahijah, 331. 

Ahimaaz, 266 n., 297. 

Ahitophel, 298. 

AL tbe}. 2oDe 

Aijalon, 95. 

Akhetaton, 39, 89. 

Akkad, 50, 76. 

Alasia, 88 f., 91, 100. 

Alphabet, 103. 

Altar, 21, 180, 241, 391, 418. 

Amalekites, 142. 

Amarna. See Tell-el-Amarna. 

Amasa, 176 f. 

Amaziah, king, 215, 238 f.; priest, 340. 

Amenhotep III, 28, 88 f., 90 f., 93. 

Amenhotep IV, 28, 39, 42, 89 f% 98. 

Amen-Ra, 421. 


Ammon, 22, 52, 108, 142, 173. 
parle 135, 140 ff., 170 f., 182, 258, 
2 


Amnon, 176 f., 205, 295. 

Amon, god, 92; king, age 

Amorites, 2 2, 3, 99, 108 f., 123. 

Amos, 49, 233, 255, 319, 338, 339 ff, 
410, 412, 414, 420. 

Amurru, 89, 93, 100. 

Anathoth, 371, 374. 

Aphek, 139, 144, 164. 

‘Apriu, 43. 

Arabia, 1 ff., 22, 237. 

Arabs, "4, Vf 5 2150,,698 

Aram, 3f., 22 ff. 

Aramean language, 249. 

Arameans, 2, 171, 173, 215 ff., 237 f., 
240. 

Architecture, 184 f., 208, 405. 

Aristocracy, 167, 220 f. 

Ark, 111, 139, 144, 163 /f., 209, 285, 330, 
387, 392, 417, 424. 

Army, Saul’s, 141 f., 168; David’s, 160, 
167 f.; Solomon’s, 181; Ahab’s, 216; 
Northern Kingdom, 221; Azariah’s, 
239; Egyptian, 87; Canaanite, 115; 
Philistine, 138. 

Arnold, W. R., 326 n. 

AYe be, 145 101218851975 203. 206 [2 
261, 384, 405. 

Artisan, 102, 189, 206, 208, 224. 

Asa, 236 f. 

Asher, 30, 115, 121, 127, 133, 157. 

Asherah, 254, 391, 418. 

Ashkelon, 28, 30, 95, 246. 

Ashur, 242 f., 251, 404, 421. 

Ashurbanipal, 256, 

Ashurnazirpal III, 242, 244. 

Assyria, culture, 243 f.; government, 
244 f.; history, 214 ff., 240, 242 f. 

Assyrians, 52, 92, 343. 

eure 237 f., 401, 403. 

Aton, 9 

ee (Uzziah), 239 f. 

Aziru, 93 f. 


Baal, 44, 104, 199, 231 f., 254, 382, 389, 
403, 417. 
Baalath, 104. 


437 


INDEX 


Baal-Melkart, 402 (cf. 332, 337, 403, 
408, 417). 

Baal of Peor, 110. 

Baasha, 213, 227, 237, 331. 

Babel, 79, 281, 283. 

Babylon, 2, 77, 257, 260, 338, 363, 368. 

Babylonia, art, 79; astrology, astron- 
omy, 81; calendar, 81; history, 75 ff., 
257; law, 77; literature, 80; magic, 82; 
monotheism, 82; myths, 80; religion, 
81 f., 103 f.; science, 81; society, 79; 
trade, 78 f.; women, 79; writing, 75, 
80 


Balaam, 285. 

Ban, 117, 395 (cf. 112). 

Barak, 11, 133, 139. 

Baruch, 374. 

Barzillai, 207, 298. 

Bashan, 120, 228, 347. 

Bathsheba, 166, 177, 331. 

Bedawy. See Nomad. 

Beer-sheba, 10, 24, 58. 

Benaiah, 168, 179 f. 

Ben-hadad, 237. 

Benjamin, 121f., 124 ff., 133, 139 ff., 
157 fF. 2073 F091; 

Beth-el, 24, 53, 281, 283, 318, 335, 339 f., 
397, 400. 

Beth-lehem, 143, 191. 

Beth-shan, 154. 

Beth-shemesh, 215, 238. 

Blessing of Jaco», 118 ff., 273. 

Blessing of Moses, 118 ff., 273. 

Blood, efficacy, 5, 52, 55, 391; revenge, 
5, 128, 159, 176 f., 315. 

Book of the Covenant, 59, 63, 312 ff., 
406 f. 

Book of the Law. See Deuteronomy. 

Book of the Upright, 273. 

Book of the Wars of Yahweh, 272 f. 

Booths, Feast of. See Ingathering. 

Burning bush, 58 f. 

Byblos, 93, 328. 


Canaan, Amarna period, 95 f.; archi- 
tecture, 101 f.; Babylonian influence, 
74f.; culture, 84, 101; Egyptian 
influence, 74; ethnology, 72; for- 
tresses, 74, 84; geography, 1, 25 
history, 72-75, 82 ff.; invasions, 2, 73, 
99 f.; lesser arts, 102; religion, 102, 
104, 385, 388 fs sculpture, 102; 
Semites, 73; trade, 84, 87; wealth, 
101; writing, 102 f. 

Cain, 5 

Caleb, O6f, 142, 153. 


Calendar, 16, 37. 

Canon, 264. 

Carchemish, 100, 258, 368. 

Carmel, 121, 196. 

Census, 168, 330. 

Chaldeans, 257 ff., 368 f. 

Chemosh, 109, 388, 402. 

Cherethites, 168. 

Chronicles, of Israel and Judah, 266; 
Book of, 239. 

Chronology, 132, 216, 300 f. 

Cilicia, 100. 

Circumcision, 51 f. 

Cities, 25, 84, 101, 106, 112, 116, 122, 
134, 190, 224, 353. 

City of Books (or ‘‘of the Scribe’’), 


103. 

Clan, 14, 189, 307. 

Commerce, 73; David, 171 f.; Solomon, 
182; North Israel, 224 ff. 

Courtesy, 7 f., 64, 96, 153, 205 ie 

Covenant, 62 f., 161 f., 248, 373, 413, 
429, 432 (cf. 387 f., 412, 414), 

Crete, 138, 405. 

Cuneiform, 75, 90. 

Custom, 7, 62, 307, 310, 386, 398, 423. 

Cyprus, 89, 91. 

Cyrus, 76, 260. 


D, 263. See Deuteronomy. 

Damascus, 171, 180, 214 ff., 241. 

Dan, tribe, 120, 132 f., 138, srt 393; 
shrine, 400. 

Dance, 210, 268. 

Dathan, 70, 285, 424. 

David, 6, 142 ff., 156 ff., 205 ff., 329 f., 
394; his laments, 155, 159, 275 f.; 
his story, 150, 294 ff., 406. 

Day of Yahweh, 346, 364, 415. 

Deborah, 7, 109, 118, 133 ff., 139, 143, 
158, 327, 426; her Song, 10, 98, 116 
(cf. 124), 132 ff., 143, 269, 273 ff., 406. 

Decalogue, Ex. 34, 313; Ex. 20, 59, 
319 f., 373, 418. 

Demons, 15 f., 51, 55. 

Desert, 1, 12 ff. 

Deuteronomy, 222, 253 ff., 302 ff., 321 
ff., 400, 418, 430 ff. (cf. 59). See D. 

Dinah, 26. 

Doeg, aa 

Doughty, 

Dreams, ‘Gaceb), 17; 326, 328. 


yi 263, 290 ff. See Ephraimite author. 
a, 81. 
Earthquake, 59, 70, 142, 289. 


438 


INDEX 


Edom, 22f., 35,52, 58f., 107 f., 142, 
171, 180, 237 f., 388. 

Edomites, 69, 182. 

Eglon, 125. 

Egypt, art, 38 f.; bondage in E., 17, 32, 
42 ff., 50, 53; building operations, 42; 
calendar, 37; capture of Gezer, 181; 
circumcision, 52; civilization, 36 fe: 
deliverance from E., 47, 50; dynasties, 
37; history, 37 f.; houses, 36; incur- 
sions of nomads, 33 f.; language, 33; 
magic, 39; medicine, 39; organization, 
38; sciences, 38 f.; sojourn in E., 19, 
21,0, 320040 f.) 44; trade; | 37, 87: 
invasions of Canaan, 85, 98 f., 215, 
257, 374. 

Ehud, 124 f., 140, 285. 

Ekron, 246. 

Elah, 213, 227. 

Elam, 76 f. 

Elath, 239 f. 

Elders, 148, 160f., 189 f., 218, 221, 307, 
ope 

Eliakim, 258. 

Eliezer, 223. 

Elijah, 49, 290, 332 ff., 402, 408 f. 

Elisha, 230, 290, 336 ff., 408 f. 

Elkanah, 201, 392. 

El roi, 9, 16. 

Eltekeh, 246, 248. 

Enlil, 76, 81. 

Ephod, 66, 309, 348, 392. 

Ephraim, 23, 110, 126, 133, 136, 139, 
142, 157 f., 184, 188, 349 f. 

Ephraimite author, 21, 23, 52, 61, 115, 
407 f., 410. See E. 

Ephron, 225 f. 

Erech, 75 f. 

Eridu, 75, 81. 

Esau, 3, 4, 12, 205 f., 280. 

Esarhaddon, 256. 

Ethiopia, 245, 251, 365, 413. 

Exile, 259 f. 

Exodus (Book of), 57, 284 f., 288. 

Ezekiel, 338, 411. 

Ezion-geber, 237. 


Family, 5, 10, 189, 307. 

Feasts, 10, 53f., 55, 194, 197 ff., 202, 
204, 279. 

Festivals, 137, 197 ff., 389, 405. 

Fig, 73 f., 194, 249: 

Flood, 80, 281, 284. 

Fortresses, Canaanite, 84; Solomon’s, 
181; Azariah’s, 239. 

Functionaries, 166, 220 f. 


Gaal, 130. 

Gad, tribe, 109, 121, 133; prophet, 152, 
167, 329 f. 

Galilee, 73, 185, 217. 

Gate, 190, ak 279, 296f.; 310 f. 

Gath, 154. 

Gaza, 95. 

Gazer, SPAS 9 

Gazri, 28, 97. 

Gedaliah, 259 f. 

Genesis (Book of), 19, 80, 262, 284, 287 f. 

Gerar, 13, 25. 

Gezer, DOM oO SLO LoL: 

Giants, 73, 106, 150, 282. 

Gibeah, 139 f., 143, 147, 191, 285. 

Gibeon, 113 f. 

Gibeonites, 113, 176, 285. 

Sten 126 ff., 136, 139, 143, 169, 285, 

92. 

Gilead,.24, 133, 135, 142, 157, 217. 

Gilgal, 113, 174, 335, 397. 

Gilgamesh, 80, 273. 

Goshen, 35, 40f., 43 f., 48, 50. 

Gubla, 28, 93 f. 

Gudea, 76. 


Habakkuk, 338, 369 f., 376, 421, 427. 

Hagar, 9 f., 291. 

Hammurabi, 2, 77, 80, 82; code of H., 
Olio lO. 

Hannah, 202, 393. 

Haran, a: 258 

Harem, David’ s, 169; Solomon’s, its hie 
3oDs 

Harvest, Feast of, 200, 389. 

Hazael, 238. 

Hebrew, language, 249, 271. 

Hebrews, 1 ff., 12, 23, 26, 242. 

Hebron, 24, 115, 157, 159 f., 173. 

Herodotus, 250. 

Heshbon, 108, 282. 

Hezekiah, 241, 245 ff., 355, 404. 

High place, 102, 146, 201, 390 f., 399. 

Hilkiah, 253. 

Hiram, 185 (cf. 173). 

Hireling, 222. 

Historical narrative, 294, 299 ff. 

Hittites, 34, 87, 93 f., 98 ff., 123, 173, 
182. 

Hivites, 123. 

Holiness, 164, 356, 395, 420 f., 423. 

Holy One, 350, 369, 414, 421. 

Horeb, 23, 48, 58, 59. 

Horites, 73. 

Hosea, 202, 227, 230, 255, 338, 347 ff., 
371, 388, 400, 410, 414, 425 f. 


439 


INDEX 


Hoshea, 214, 217. 

Hospitality, 8, 11, 191 f. 

Host of heaven, 16, 251, 254, 404. 
Huldah, 253. 

Hushai, 298. 

Hyksos, 34, 37f., 85. 


‘ibrim, 29. 

Ikhnaton, 89, 98. 

Images, 391, 417 ff. 

Individual, 218, 220, 287, 298, 424, 429, 
433 (cf. 71). 

Ingathering, Feast of, 194, 200 f., 389. 

Invasions of Canaan, 26 f., 106 ff. 

Isaac, 3, 12, 20, 25, 29, 292 f. 

Isaiah, 49, 193, 202, 227, 229, 246, 
ANIM Pay SB Reb ic Sy ANT) 
412, 414, 426. 

Ishbaal, 157 ff. 

Ishmael, son of Abraham, 4, 5, 11, 23; 
son of Nethaniah, 260. 

Ishtar, of Nineveh, 91; her descent to 
the lower world, 80. 

Israel, 20, 30, 173, etc.; kingdom, 213 ff, 
236, 283, 348. 

Israelites, 22 f. 

Issachar, 120, 133, 213. 


J, 262 ff., 284-289. See Judahite author. 

Jabbok, 108. i 

Jabesh, 140 f., 155, 158, 171. 

Jacob, 3 ff., 15 ff., 20 f., 24, 26, 29 f., 34, 
195, 204 f., 209, 222, 280. 

Jacob-Israel, 20, 45. 

Jael, 9 ff. (cf. 133). 

Jair, 135. 

Jebusites, 123, 173. 

JED, 264. 

Jehoahaz, king of Israel, 214, 216; 
king of Judah, 258. 

Jehoash, 237 f., 401. 

Jehoiada, 238, 401. 

Jehoiakim, 258 f., 374. 

Jehonadab, 409. 

Jehoram, 215, 237. 

Jehoshaphat, 237, 333. 

Jehu, king, 214, 216, 229 ff., 242, 402, 
408; prophet, 331. 

Jephthah, 135 f., 169, 285. 

Jeremiah, 49, 338, 370 ff., 410, 414, 420, 
428 f. 

Jericho, 111 f., 126 (cf. 124), 335. 

Jeroboam I, 212 ff., 227, 331, 400. 

Jeroboam IT, 214, 216 f., 240, 338 f. 

Jerubbaal, 127, 129. 

Jerusalem, 28 f., 95 f., 113 f, 121, 162 f., 


166, ‘173, 184 7,,191 f) 215,;24008 
295, 259 f., 353, 355, 357, 405, 414. 

Jesse, 152. 

Jesus, 423. 

Jethro, 64 f., 205 (cf. 51). 

Jews, 11, 226, 323, 358 (cf. 56). 

Jezebel, 229, 231 f., 332 f., 402, 409. 

Jezreel, 132, 157, 221, 228, 230 f. 

Jinn, 15. 

Joab, 159 ff., 168, 176 ff., 180, 298, 315. 

Joash, 214 ff., 240. 

Job, 16, 376. 

John the Baptist, 49. 

Jonah, 338. 

Jonathan, 141, 143, 169, 206. 

Joppa, 163. 

Joram, 214, 230. 

Joseph, son of Jacob, 24, 30, 32 f., 35 f., 
41, 99; tribes, 115, 121, 141 f. 

Joshua, 7, 110 ff.; Book of J., 285, 288. 

Josiah, 252 ff.,:257, 364. 

Jotham, son of Gideon, 129 f.; his fable, 
129 f., 149, 194, 268; king of Judah, 
240. 

Jubal, 208. 

Judah, son of Jacob, 194; tribe, 24, 44, 
LOT SS VISE 133 5 ea 5 apenas 
178, 184, 188, 193, 212, 215 f.; king- 
dom, 213, 236 ff., 283. 

Judahite author, 3, 21, 23, 52, 61, 407, 
410. See J. 

Judaism, 67, 199, 260 f., 262, 277, 323f., 
401, 433 (cf. 59). 

Judea, 204 (cf. 213, 236). 

Judges, 7, 65, 136, 189, 232, 308 ff; Book 
of J., 124, 285, 288, 294. 

Justice, 307 ff.; Moses, 65 ff.;. united 
Kingdom, 189; North Israel, 232 f. 


Kadesh, 56 f., 60, 64, 67, 71, 106/f. 

Karkar, 216, 242. 

Karnak, 30. 

Kassites, 78, 85, 242. 

Keilah, 95, 142, 152. 

Kenites, 48. 

Kenizzites, 107. 

Keturah, 23. 

Khabiru, 28 f., 39, 43, 93, 95, 99, 114 f. 

Kings, Book of, 251, 262, 299 ff., 331. 

Kingship, 123, 128 f., 141 ff., 147, 149, 
161 f., 166, 180, 218 f. 

Kish, 145. 

Kishon, 132 f., 143. 


Laban, 3, 194, 209, 292. 
Labor, 192 ff., 223 f. See Levy. 


440 


INDEX 


Lachish, 28, 95, 247. 

Lagash, 76. 

Laish, 120. 

Lamech, 7. 

Land tenure, 196, 221 f., 234, 352. 

Larsa, 75. 

Law (Hebrew), 59, 62, 67, 77, 307 ff. 

Leah, 44. 

Lebanon, 74, 88. 

Legends, 14, 19-22, 48, 53, 132, 210/f., 
278, 281, 285, 289. 

Legislation, 61. See Law. 

Levi, 25 f., 66, 95, 118 f., 133. 

Levites, 66, 119 n., 191, 393. 

Leviticus, 57. 

Levy (labor), 167, 183 f., 219, 233. 

Literature, 210 f., 262-306. 

Topo wi alsezoazon LOS. 

Lot (sacred), 66f., 113, 151, 309, 327, 
388, 391. 

Lugalzaggisi, 75. 

Luxury, 87, 172, 183 f., 225, 228 f. 


Machir, 133. 

Magic, 50;,52, 112, 322,’ 326, 335 f. 
(cf. 68). 

Magicians, 326. 

Manasseh, tribe, 126 ff., 133, 139, 142 f., 
158; king, 251 f., 404, 430. 

Manna, 68. 

Manners, 108, 176f., 191, 193, 205 f., 
OPA joys OPA i, PAIBY AWE STIPE 

Marduk, 81 f., 421. 

Maspero, 88 n. . 

Matstsebah, 391, 418. 

Mattaniah, 259. 

Medes, 257. 

Megiddo, 86 f., 95, 133, 257. 

Memphis, 37, 41 f. 

Menahem, 214, 217, 229. 

Menes, 37. 

Meribaal, 169, 174 f., 196. 

Merneptah, 30, 45, 99. 

Merodach-baladan, 246. 

Mesha, 110. 

Messiah, 358 (cf. 381 f.), 415. 

Micah, Jud. 17, 288, 392; prophet, 222, 
255, 338, 352 ff., 374, 414, 430 n. 

Micaiah, 334, 409, 416. 

Midian, 58, 64 f., 127 ff. 

Midianites, 48, 66, 110, 126 ff. 

Migrations (Semitic), 2, 22. 

Milcom, 388, 402. 

Miriam, 70, 209. 

Mitanni, 89, 91, 93. 

Mizpah, 151, 260. 


nea Day Bes Me ih, Bee Ubi. Pals 
Ve 

Moabites, 109 f., 124 ff., 170, 182, 258. 
Mohammed, 49. 

Molech, 254. 

Molten calf, 68. 

Montesquieu, 180 n. 

Morality, 289, 315, 318, 407, 415. 
Moses, 7 f., 20, 32 f., 36, 41, 47-71, 80, 
106, 110, 205, 277, 308, 312, 321. 
Music, 195, 208 ff., 228, 276 (cf. 336). 

Myth, 20, 273, 282, 411. 


Nabal, 152 f., 194, 196, 204. 
Nabi’, 329. 

Nabopolassar, 257. 

Naboth, 230, 332, 352, 408. 
Nadab, 63; king of Israel, 213. 
Nahash, 171. 

Nahor, 3. 

Nahum, 338, 366 ff. 
Naphtali, 121, 127, 133, 158. 
Naram-sin, 76. 

Nathan, 166, 179, 330 f. 
Nebi’im, 335. 
Nebuchadrezzar, 258 f. 
Necho, 368 (cf. 258). 
Necromancer, 324 f. 

Nergal, 91. 

New Moon, 198 f., 348, 389. 
Nineveh, 256 f., 365 f., 368. 
Nippur, 75, 81. 

Noah, 20, 391. 

Nob, 147 f. 

Nomads, 1, 4-18. 

Northern Kingdom, 213 ff. 
Numbers (Book of), 57, 285, 288. 


Obed-edom, 164, 424. 

Olive, 194. 

Omri, 214 f., 227. 

Ophir, 237. 

Ophrah, 128 f. 

Oreb, 127. 

Organization, tribal, 5 f., 145; Moses’, 
65; communal, 137, 308; Solomon’s, 
183; Northern Kingdom, 218, 220. 

Osiris, 421. 


P, 263. See Priestly author. 

Padi, 246 f. 

Palace, David’s, 169; Solomon’s, 185. 
Paran, 57, 59. 

Passover, 53-56, 200, 389. 
Patriarchs, 19 f., 24. 

Pekah, 214, 217, 240, 243, 355, 358. 


441 


INDEX 


Pekahiah, 214. 

Pelethites, 168. 

Penuel, 127, 215. 

Pepi I, 74, 

Perizzites, 123. 

Pesel, 418. 

Petrie, Flinders, 40 n. 

epee 52, 69, 100f., 121, 135, 
, 152 ff, 164, 170, 192, 207 f., 


Phoenicia, 101, 224 f. 

Pheenicians, 2, 52; 1207 216: 

Pilgrimage, 137, 201, 279, 392. 

Pithom, 35, 42. 

PJED, 264. 

Plagues, 47, 49, 284. 

Poetry, 267 ff., 366 f. 

Priests, 66, 137, 147 f., 189 f., 221, 286, 
309 f., 325, 365, 391, 398 ff; ‘chief 
priest, 219. 

Priestly author, 3, 23, 52, 110, 199. 
See P. 

Prophets, 15, 49, 144, 152, 166 f., 204, 
220, 234 f., 292, 326, 327 ff, 377 ff, 
423, 433; sycophant prophets, 333 f., 
354, 365; books of the prophets, 378; 
sons of the prophets, 327 f., 333, 409. 

Psalms, 16, 80 f., 210. 

Pulesti, 100. 


Qina, 270, 346. 


Raamses, 42. 

Rabsaris, 248. 

Rabshakeh, 248 ff. 

Rachel, 8, 44. 

Rahab, harlot, 111/f., 190, 285, 288; 
Egypt, 360. 

Ramah, 145, 191 f., 391. 

Ramman-Adad, 104. 

Ramses II, 30, 42 f., 99, 115. 

Ramses III, 100, 138. 

Raphia, 246, 355. 

Rebekah, 8 f. 

Rechabites, 389, 409 f. 

Rehoboam, 162, oie f. 

Religion, 255, 380, 385 ff., 406 ff. 

Retaliation, 61, Buy, 

Reuben, 69 f., 109, 118, 133. 

Reuel, 8. 

Rezin, 240 f., 243, 355, 358. 

Rezon, 180. 

Rib-addi, 28, 93 f., 95. 

Riddles, 203, 268. 

Ritual, 17, 55, 318, 396 f., 405, 423 f. 

Ruth (Book of), 193, 262 n. 


Sabbath, 53, 199, 320. 

Sacred Prostitutes, 202 (cf. 389). 

Sacrifice, 65, 197 f., 391 f., 394 f., 423 f.; 
child sacrifice, 293, 403. 

Sa-Gaz, 28 f., 39, 93 f., 99. 

Samaria, 24, 213, 217 f., 227 f., 245, 345. 

Samaritans, 218, 410. 

Samson, 104, 135, 138, 203, 268, 285, 288. 

Samuel, 145 ff., 190, 198, 219, 328, 401. 
Book of S., 286, 288, 295 ff. 

Sanctuary, 163, 185, 201, 203, 255, 391. 

Sarah, 8f., 35. 

Sargon I, 2, 50, 76, 80. 

Sargon II, 217 f., 245 f. 

Saul, 7, 140-156, 168 f., 171, 190, 192, 
198, 209, 325, 327, 392, 416. 

Scribes, 90, 103, 166, 324. 

Scythians, 257, 364, 370. 

Seer, 167, 325 f., 329 f. 

Seir, 58 f. 

Semi-nomads, 12, 25 f. 

Semites, 15, 74, 256. 

Seneh, 59. 

Sennacherib, 246 ff. 

Serpent, in Eden, 16; brazen, 404, 418. 

Seti I, 30, 42. 

Shallum, 214. 

Shalmanezer I, 242. 

Shalmanezer IT, 242. 

Shalmanezer IV, 217, 245. 

Shamash, 104, 421. 

Shamgar, 135, 192. 

Shaphan, 253, 259. 

Sheba, 175. 

Shechem, city, 24, 25f., 28, 95, 119, 
i ff., 212, 215, 227; son of Hamor, 


Sheep-shearing, 152, 195; Feast of, 204, 
38 


Sheikh, 6 f., 189, 307. 
Shemaiah, 331. 

Sheol, 70, 415. 

Shepherds, 194 f. (cf. 41). 
Shibboleth, 136. 

Shiloh, 139, 202, 373, 391 f. 
Shimei, 166, 174 f., 177, 298. 
Shirpurla, 76. 

Sibboleth, 136. 

Sidon, 2, 28, 225, 246: 
Sidonians, 121, 182, 208. 
Sihon, 108 f. 

Simeon, 25 f., 95, 118 f., 133. 
Sin (Babylonian god), 104. 
Sin (sense of), 15, 425; 399, 424. 
Sinai, 23, 48, 59 f., 67. 
Sinuhe, 33, 83, 88. 


442 


INDEX 


Sisera, 7, 10, 98, 120, 133 ff. 

Slaves, 9, 192, 223, 316. 

Snefru, 74. 

Social conditions, 131, 134, 137, 160, 
172, 188; differences, 196, 218, 220, 
232; injustice, 196f., 223, 382 ff.; 
prophets’ criticism of, 379 f.; organi- 
zation, 220, 

Sodom, 25. 

Sodomites, 254. 

Solomon, 6, 148, 162, 170, 172, 179 ff., 
PBS y PMP, BM Ai APS 

Song of Songs, 227. 

Spies, 106, 111, 171. 

Spirit of Yahweh, 141, 416; lying spirit, 
334, 416. 

Succoth, 127. 

Sumer, 75 f. 

Superstitions, 394. 

Suti, 94. 

Syria, 89, 92-94. 


Taanach, 133. 

Tabor, 128. 

Tamar, 194, 298. 

Tammuz, 80. 

Tarshish, 237, 240. 

Tartan, 248. 

Taxes, 160, 183, 219, 233. 

Tell-el-Amarna, 27, 88 f.; letters, 28-30, 
88 ff., 114, 162, 166, 206, 241. 

Temple, 391; (at Jerusalem), 185, 238, 
247, 253, 255, 259, 372, 397 ff., 400, 
A414. 

Ten Words. See Decalogue. 

Teraphim, 254, 348, 392, 394, 418. 

Thebes, 37, 39, 41 f., 85. 

Thebez, 131. 

Theophany, 49, 60. 

Thutmose III, 30, 85 ff., 92. 

Tibni, 214. 

Tiglath-pilezer I, 242; III, 217, 241, 
243. 


Tirzah, 227. 

Topheth, 254, 

Torah, 62, 66, 309, 325, 399. 

Tribal system, 3 f., 6, 307. 

Tribes, 23, 26, 44 f., 118 f.; rivalry of, 
124, 148, 156, 173 f., 178, 212. 


Tut-ankh-amen, 98. 
Tyre, 2, 29, 98, 169, 173, 182, 185, 225. 


Unleavened Bread, Feast of, 53 f., 200, 
389. 

Uraoeaoe 

Uriah, 166, 298. 

Urim and Thummim, 66, 309. 

Uzzah, 395 (cf. 164). 

Uzziah (Azariah), 239 f., 355. 


Vineyard, 193 f., 409. 
Visions, 291, 330, 341 f., 419. 


Water, 12 f., 68, 279, 288, 371, 417, 428. 
Wealth, 183 f., 196, 207, 226 f., 232, 240. 
Wen-Amon, 328 f. 

Wizards, 251, 254, 325, 359. 

Woman, 8 f., 51, 192, 228 f., 343, 432. 
Woolley and Lawrence, 58 n. 

Worship, 167, 391 f., 397, 423 f., 432. 
Writing, 102 f., 210, 265, 362 f. 


Yahweh, 5, 21, 23, 47f., 50, 55, 58, 60, 
62, 65, 386 ff., etc.; in J, 289, 407; in 
E, 291 f., 407; in the Book of the 
Covenant, 314 f., 406 f.; in the proph- 
ets, 411 ff.; in D, 430 ff. 

Ysiraal, 30, 34. 


Zadok, 174, 179, 401. 

Zakar-baal, 328. 

Zalmunna, 127 f. 

Zebah, 127 f. 

Zebul, 130. 

Zebulon, 119 f., 127, 133. 

Zechariah, 214. 

Zedekiah, king, 259, 374f.; prophet, 
334 f. 

Zeeb, 127. 

Zephaniah, 49, 338, 364 ff. 

Zeruiah, 160. 

Ziba, 196, 223. 

Ziklag, 154. 

Zimri, 213, 227, 230. 


Zine 

Zion, 353, 357, 360, 363. 
Zipporah, 8, 52, 280 (cf. 48, 51). - 
Zuph, 145. 





REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES ~ 


PAGE LINES 


3 


Gen.113! 
Gen.12! 
Gen.24 
Gen.29! 
Gen.29 
Deut.26° 


Gen.13 
Gen.16!2 
Gen.45 
Gen.95-6 


2 Sam.1312 
Gen.13 
Gen.1215/f 
Gen.20 


Gen.181-8 


sf Gen.2415 


Gen.298 
Ex.2'6 


Gen.2457f 
Gen.2455 
Gen.2522 
Gen.27 


Gen.2114-20 
Jud.4214 


Gen.13 
Gen.2125/f 
Num.21!7 
Deut.87 


Gen.3¥F 
Zeph.15 
Jer.8? 1913 
Gen.16 
Gen.18! 


Gen.2815-18 


Gen.92°/F 
Gen.615// 


PAGE LINES 


21 
22 


25f 
29f 
30 
23 
2-3 


14 
22 


24 


25 


26 


32 
34 


35 


36 


40 


42 


21 

1 

12 
22-24 
27-30 


of 
7-18 


1-10 


23f 
24f 


19-27 


Gen.12¥/ 


Gen.27 
Gen.1936-38 


Gen.251!-4 
Ex.314 
Gen.172° 
95 13/f 
Gen.3615-19 


40-43 


Gen.23; 21 
Gen.121°/f 
37ff 
Gen.28; 34; 
31 
Gen.29f 


Gen.12 
Gen.19; 26 
Gen.34. 
Gen.495 7 


Gen.497 
Gen.34 


Deut.265-9 


Gen.121° 
Gen.42'f 


Gen.1214/f 


27ff Gen.41 


1-5 
o- 7 
6 
15-18 
19-21 


17f 
18 


15-26 
4 


445 


Gen.4142f 
Ex.5VS 


Gen.45-47 
Ex.17 
Ex.123"7 


Gen.4145 50 
Ex.210 


Ex.18-'4 
Ex.114 


PAGE LINES 
44 
9 


AT 
15f 


16 
48 
9-26 


49 
3 Ex.7ff 
5 
25f 
3 Ex.210 
Af Ex.78-18 
14f Ex.152! 


24 Ex.14 
30f Ex.1321 - 


Num.115 


Ex.7f 
Ex.1427 


51 
1- 3 


Num.1079-8! 


14ff Ex.42+26 


52 
22 
23 


Gen.1710-14 
Jos.52°3 


Ex.115 
Ex.122us 
Ex.4.24-26 
Ex.201! 
Ex.1217 
Gen.281%/F 
Gen.3233 


Ex.53 
Ex.82-23 
Ex.1215-20 


Ex.1242 
Ex.53 
Am,52 


Ex.1226/ 
Num.20! 


Num.20! 
Num.10! 


Gen.368 
Num.20!4 
Ex.3! 18 


PAGE LINES 


16-18 
18-20 

59 
18-23 
26-29 
32 


60 


4-10 
17-22 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES 


Ex.37% 
Ex.53 


Jud.54f 
Deut.33? 
Ex.3? 4 
Deut.33! 


Ex.1918 
Ex.2427 


Ex.2229 
Ex.23}8 
Ex.2319 
Ex.2123/ 


Ex.247 


Ex.2468 
Ex.249-4 


15ff Ex.18% 7-12 
20ff Ex.18/ 


21-24 
67 
If 


22 


Deut.338 1° 


Ex.2839 
Ex.1238 


27ff Num.114/ 


Ex.17%/ 
Ex.1523/f 
Num.20!! 
Ex.1614f 
Num.113¥ 
Ex.32 


15ff Num.16 


18 
73 


84 
85 


Ex.38 


Gen.146 
Num.13*2 


Gen.11 


Jos.771 
Gen.613// 


Deut.35 


Jud.17* 2125 


PAGE LINES 


lly 


Gen.34 


8 
23-26 Jud.5 
5 Jos 1515/ 


103 
104 
106 


18 


Jud.14ff 


14ff Num.13 


108 
11-21 
109 


110 


111 
7-23 


Num.2014-24 


Num.21?! 
Jud.5! 6 


Num.25!-3 
Num.25° 
Deut.34 


Jos.2 


26ff Jos.6 


112 
20f 
113 


6-24 


Jos.7f 
Jos.9 


28ff Jos.10 


115 
3-10 
21-24 

116 


118 


119 


120 


121 


Jos.11 
Jud.1 


Jud.5 
Jos.1113 


Jud.516 
Deut.33° 


Gen.495 7 
Gen.34 
Jud.11/f 
Gen.497 
Deut.337 
Gen.498// 


Gen.4915 
Jud.515 
Jud.18 
Deut.3372 
Gen.4917 
Gen.4.915 


Deut.3370 
Gen.492° 
Deut.3324 
Deut.3373 


446 


PAGE LINES 


121 


12f 


Gen.4923f 
Deut.3317 
Gen.4922 
Deut.331? 
Deut.3313F 


Gen.4927 
Jud.176 2125 
Jud.5® 


Jud.132 
Jud.3f 
Jud.58 
Jud.57 


Jud.51! 


27ff Jud.34F 


125 
1]-22 
23-27 


Jud.321-25 
Jud.3?6/F 


Jud.6° 
Jud.6? 
Jud.61! 
Jud.61F 
Jud.819 


28ff Jud.8 


6 


Jud.7?3—83 
Jud.8417 


Jud.818-24 
Jud.8?2 
Jud.829-31 
Jud.823-27 
Jud.9 
Jud.5 


Jud.334 


7f Jud.10%5 


of 
10-12 


Jud.12 = 
Jud.13-16 


21ff Jud.11 


1I=9 


Jud.1216 


Jud.18 
Jud.13-16 


1 Sam.42-4 
Jer.712 14 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES 


PAGE LINES PAGH LINES 
139 160 
18 1Sam.13¥ 20 2 Sam.4? 
140 20f 2 Sam.3?2 
18ff 1 Sam.11 25f 2 Sam.4! 
141 26-28 2 Sam.3%9 
22ff 1 Sam.13 29ff 2 Sam.4® 
142 (Septuagint 
1-11 1Sam.14 Greek text) 
24-27 1Sam.23!2 {161 
27-29 1 Sam.251% 16-19 2 Sam.53 
29f 1Sam.227 {162 
143 13° 1: Ki12 
9-11 1Sam.18ff 24ff 2 Sam.5*/f 
llf 1Sam.14°% |163 
12-15 1 Sam.1618-23 28 ~Ex.25/f 
18-20 1Sam.22° {164 
144 1 1 Sam.45-11 
3-6 1Sam.10°/ lf 1Sam.5// 
9-11 1Sam.10!¥ 8ff 2 Sam.6°// 
145- 165 
146 1 Sam.9 13-20 2 Sam.6?° 
147 166 
16-24 1Sam.15 Tf 2Sam.15*/ 
25ff 1 Sam.22%// 8-10 2 Sam.11 
2605 0 Sam.213-* 13-15 2 Sam.12 
150 19f 2Sam.14 
26 1Sam.17 16f 2 Sam.16°// 
30 1 Sam.16!4-23 23-25 2 Sam.816 
151 2023 26 
17-19 1 Sam.223 30f 2 Sam.2074 
19-21 1Sam.22¥ |167 
22ff 1 Sam.2220// 6 2 Sam.8!7/ 
235 7 2Sam.241! 
152 168 
1 1 Sam.225 8 2Sam.24/ 
7-16 1Sam.23'5 16f 2 Sam.8!8 
18ff 1 Sam.252// 20 2 Sam.238// 
154 29 2 Sam.816 
1-10 1Sam.27!2 29f 2 Sam.8!8 
10-13. 1 Sam.29?/f |169 
23ff 1 Sam.31 9-11 2 Sam.51! 
155 14f 2 Sam.3?5 
10-18 2 Sam.1 15-17 2 Sam.513-16 
157 1516 
14-21 2 Sam.2%-1! 17f 2 Sam.137 
28f 2 Sam.2‘ 20 2 Sam.15! 
158 1 Ki.15 
re 25-30 2 Sam.2*7 29ff 2 Sam.9°/f 
6-9 2 Sam.2!2-23 18-23 2 Sam.5!7// 
12-20 2 Sam.35/f 81 21 5/F 
22-27 2 Sam.45/f Zou 
i 27ff 2 Sam.33V/ 25-27 2Sam.8? 


3f 2 Sam.4!2 


If 


1 Sam.11 


447 


PAGE LINES 


171 
2-10 
11-14 
14-17 
17-20 

173 
3-5 


6 
11-14 
14-16 
16-19 
22-25 

174 
2- 6 


6-10 


2 Sam.1017 
2 Sam.1226-32 
2 Sam.85/f 

2 Sam.814 


2 Sam.5*f 
2 Sam.116 

2 Sam.8°% 

2 Sam.514 

2 Sam.101-5 
2 Sam.157-10 


2 Sam.163 
2 Sam.165/f 


15ff 2 Sam.19°/f 


175 
Il 
13 
14-24 

176 
il 


14-20 


2 Sam.1916/ 
2 Sam.1924/F 
2 Sam.20¥F 


2 Sam.13 
2 Sam.1428/f 


22f 2 Sam.21/f 


28f 


2 Sam.327 


29ff 2 Sam.204// 


177 
11-16 
ug) 
22 

178 
5-21 


2 Sam.1328/f 
2 Sam.1923 
2 Sam.1213 


2 Sam. 15 Vf 


22ff 1 Kile 


179 
5 
13-20 

180 
I-73 
ove 


2 
2 
181 


182 


183 
Tee 


15-20 
20-25 


2f 
3ff 1 Ki.1128-25 


PRU 
TL Ri13 8 


1 Ku21:25 
1 Ki.228/f 
ELS We 


1 Ki.916 
1 Ki.91s 
LRGs 
1 Ka589%? 


Kelis 

L.Ki31 9% 

1 Ki.926/F 
1011 


1 Ki.6ff 
1 Kia? 
1 Ki5" 


PAGE LINES 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES 


25ff 1 Ki.5'// 


184 
11-14 
17-19 


4 

af 
2a 
24 


3- 6 


186 


190 


19-22 


1 Ki.112ss 
1 Ki.10?7 


1 Ki.6% 
1 Ki.7! 
1 Kis" 
1 Ki.910-14 


1 Ki.l1¥/ 
Kiss 
1 Ki.10!-10 


1 Sam.925/ 
2 Sam.16?2 
Jos.26 

2 Sam.11? 
Jud.1913-21 


1 Sam.115 
Jud.31 


Gen.4911 


23ff Is.5¥f 


9-13 
19f 
28 


15-22 


18-21 
21-24 


Jud.98/f 
1 Ki.425 
Gen.29 

1 Sam.25 


Gen.3138-40 


2 Sam.9% 
2 Sam.16! 


PAGE LINES 


PAGE LINES 


12f 1Sam.9!V/ 
29ff 1 Sam.205-29 


Ex.35°/ 
Ex.232 3422 


14 
14-18 


Loa 
4— 6 
17-19 
27 


28f 
201 


Hos.25 
Hos.28 
Ex.2315 
Deut.16% 
Ex.2316 
Ex.2316 


Ex.34°2 
Ex.3422 
Ex.2317 
Deut.1424/f 


1 214 
26-28 Jud.927 AT cA2 ict 
29ff 1 Sam.1¥* 18 2 Ki.15!% 
202: 19 2 Ki.152% 
13-18 Jud.21?! 20 2 Ki.152*F 
20-23 Is.30°9 21 92 Ki l7y 
24-26 Hos.2!! 30 1 Ki.159 
203 215 
10 Jud.1414 2f 2 Ki.818 
204 5- 9 2 Ki.148-14 
17-19 1 Sam.25? 9-12 2 Ki.16/f 
2 Sam.1323// 25f 2 Sam.8/ 
27ff 1 Sam.252/f 27f 1 Ki.204 
2 216 
2-5 2 Sam.1325// 2f 1Ki.20u7 
15 Gen.18¥/ Af 1 Ki.20%4 
16 Ex.187 23f 2 Ki.8!2 
17-22 1 Sam.2528 Am.13 
28ff Gen.33!-4 26-28 2 Ki.1317 
206 28-30 2 Ki.135 
3- 6 1Sam.204! 30f 2 Ki.14% 
207 217 
10-13 Deut.6'!% 6- 8 2 Ki.151% 
17-20 2 Sam.1728 8-12 2 Ki.15?9 
29ff 1 Sam.132% 13f 2 Ki.16® 
208 18-20 2 Ki.15% 
18f 1 Ki.5® aiff DRIES 
28f Gen.4?! 219 
209 9-22 1 Sam.81!-17 
1-3 1Sam.65%5) {221 
3-5 2Sam.19%5 | lf 1 Ki.‘ 
6- 8 Gen.31?? 21-23 2 Ki.105 
19f 1Sam.167% |222 
28 ff Ex.152 6-9 1 Ki.21"16 
212 11-13 Mic.2? 
6-8 1 Ki.112°// 23-28 Deut.2414f 
Off 1 Ki.12/ 28f Gen.2915/f 
13 223 
21f 1 Ki.14% 10 Gen.15? 24 
29f 1 Ki.152/ 11 1Sam.9 
23-25 1 Ki.1533/ 12 2Sam.9 16 
26f 1 Ki.168 20-24 Ex.21°// 
27-30 1 Ki.169 1% {225 
214 22-24 Is.55} 
1-5 1 Ki,1618-20 30ff Gen.2310-16 
6f 1 Ki.162/ 227 
tL Ki1678 12f Hos.128 
8 1 Ki.169 13f Is.27 
Ome Ki222° 22 1 Ki.1225 
10 2 Ki.3!s/ 23f Song 64 
11-13 2 Ki.10 25 1 Ki.153 
14 2 Ki.13 168 15 
Gy PALS Bs 26 1 Ki.161/ 
1423f 26-29 1 Ki.1674 
16 2 Ki.15/ 


448 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES © 


PAGE LINES 


29 
——_ 


230 


238 


239 


240 


241 
243 


4-7 1 Ki.18ss 
Tf 1 Ki.2239 

19-26 Am.64/ 

26-29 Is.51 
30ff Am.41 


3-7 2 Ki.930/ 
Tis Rk CRS See 
24-27 2 Ki.151* 


14-23 2 Ki.10/ 


6f Jud.6% 
7f 1 Sam.22 


lif Am.5?2 


Neh.525 
Am.28 


1 Ki.1518-20 
1 Ki.228 

of 2 Kigi 

1 Ki.2248/ 
2 Kia 

2 Ki.820-22 
2 Ki.927 

2 Kills 


2 Ki.11 
ZKiiZt 
2 Ki.12* 
2 Ki.145 

2 Ki.147 

2 Ki.148-14 
2 Ki.1417-19 


2 Ki.142! 
2 Ki.1422 


2f Is.6} 
5-13 Is.25-16 
PPh PAA BIN GY 
23-26 2 Ki.15%5 
26ff 2 Ki.16*-9 


10-49 5 2 K1:1610-38 
I-13. 2 Ki.15%° 


PAGE LINES 


B) 
16-20, 2 Ki.17*+6 


246 


247 


_ 


tt 


250 


270 


274 


16f 2 Ki.20" 
21-30 2 Ki.1g/s 
1Off 2 Ki.1g17/7 


10-18 2 Ki.182/ 
23ff 2 Ki.1828-35 


10-13 2 Ki.18%6 
14-18 2 Ki.19% 


of 2 Ki.lss 
20ff 2 Ki.21-18 


15-19 2 Ki.211%24 
Sif 2 Ki.22% 
3-23 2 Ki.231-%4 


3f Is.6% 
16f Deut.125/7 


PN SEBEL 


2 Ki.23%° 
2 Ki.255%" 
2 Ki.24¥ 


2 Ki. 24e46 
2 Ki.24"7 


11-13 
13-27 2 Ki.2420— 
9521 


off 2 Wigan e 
26-30 Jud.8'4 
6 2Sam.816§ 


5f Gen.4?3 

8 Num.21!? 

10f Deut.3318 

13f Jud.5* 
16-18 Ex.15?4 
21-28 1Sam.18% 
6- 9 


Am.5? 
18-24 Jud.54/ 
20-23 


Jud.5/ 
26-31 Jud.5!% 


449 


24-30 
1- 3 
4— 8 

24-29 


2-6 


PAGE LINES 


2- 5 
8-18 


Jud.58 
Jud.519-22 


28/f 2 Sam.119-27 
11 ff Ex.15¥ 


2if 


Gen.2527-84 
Gen.3224-29 
Ex.424-26 


Gen.30274F 
Gen.121V/S 
Gen.28107F 
Gen.2°/f 
Gen.7f; 11 
Gen.37ff 


29ff Gen.6VS 


285 


Gen.1119 


Gen.25-3 
Gen.920-27 
Gen.1119 


Ex. 1221-23 27 
13217-1430 
Ex.1522/f 


. Ex.19 34 


Num.1029-33 
Num.11 
Num.1317/f 
Num.161/ 
Num.20f 
Num.21-24 | 
Deut.34 
Jos.2 
Jos.3f 
Jos.7f 

Jos.9 
Jud.17f 
Jud.19-21 
Jud.313-30 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES 


PAGE LINES 


286 


292 


293 
295 


296 


300 


315 


13. 2Kill 
14f 2 Kill 


13. Gen.207 

14 Deut.3419 

18 Gen.20}2 
18-20 Gen.317 


1ff Gen.22/ 
2 Sam.9 


2 Sam.19 
13. 2 Sam.20 
13-15 1 Kilf 


6-20 2 Sam.1428-33 
29ff 2 Sam.1824-38 


1p LpKi17-19 


20-22 
2 Ki.of 
18-20 

27ff Deut.7/ 


2-4 Deut.15* 


19ff Deut.432-40 


10-12 Gen.413/ 
21-24 Ex.1825/ 


30ff 2 Sam.14V// 


of 1 Kids 
5-12 


Ex.2317 
Ex.239 


Ex.222% 
Ex.2318 
Ex.2319 


Ex.2125/f 
if 2 Sam.3%° 


Ex.22?1-23 
Ex.2311 
Ex.234f 
Ex.231 


2 Sam.11f 

2 Sam.131-19 
2 Sam.132%F 
2 Sam.15-18 


2 Sam.15?-4 


2 Sam.146/ 


PAGE LINES 


318 


326 


327 


329 


330 


331 


332 


PAGE LINES 


3 
Ex.238 6 21-23 1 Ki.2013// 
23f 1:Ki2024F 
Am.5?! 24 24-31 1 Ki.20%5/7 
Mic.6%/ 334 
1-20 1 Ki.225-12 
Ex.20?2 21-31 1 Ki.2213/f 
335 
Deut.15'1! 4 2 .Ki.23 438 
12-18 95 
Deut.1618 5-7 1 Ki.228 
Deut.1714-29 1336 
1815-22 6f 1 Ki.1919 
Deut.181%/ 12-21 2 Ki.3/ 
Deut.19'13 1338 
14 15-21 Af 22 Ki.1425 
Deut.20 339 
Deut.2110-14 3 2 Ki.19f 
Deut.221-4 3f Jer.2618 
Deut.2222-27 21f Am.55 4 
28f 30 241-4 22-25 Am.521 
Deut.255-10 25-27 Am.79 
2319 248 1340 
10-13 2513-16 9-17 Am.710-15 
Deut.22/ 341 
Deut.228 5f Am.211 
6 Hos.121° 
1 Sam.9 7-9 Jer.3515 
1 Sam.28 342 
15f Am.7¥ 
1 Sam.289 16f Am.47 
Deut.181° 19 Am.73 
Deut.18!5 19-23 Am.8/ 
23-28 Am.77 
Jud.44 343 
1 Ki.2041 16-18 Am.28 
1 Sam.105 20-22 Am.41 
1 Sam.1920-24 27-29 Am.614 
344 
1 Sam.2411 lf Am.44 
4-6 Am.5?1-23 
1 Sam.225 of Am.78 8? 
2 Sam.241V/ 12-14 Am.2%% 
14f Am.21 
2 Sam.12 15-17 Am.510 18 
1 Ki.12F 19-21 Am.46-11 
1 Ki.112%7 24f Am.3? 
1 Ki.l4 29f Am.3)4f 
1 Ki.1222-24 1345 
1 Ki.161-4 3— 6 Am.3!2 
10-15 Am.81° 
1 Ki.17! 18 24-26 Am.1l 
1 Ki.21 29f Am.26 
1 Ki.2117-27 3- 7 Am.81! 


450 


PAGE LINES 
346 
7-12 
14-16 
21-24 
27-30 


3-12 
21-26 
30f 


347 


348 


349 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES 


Am.518f 
Am.523 
Am.6?2 
Am.52 


Am.41f 
Hos.1 3 
Hos.25 


Hos.28/f 
Hos.34 


Hos.14! 
Hos.11! 3 
Hos.67 
Hos.4 
Hos.9!7 
Hos.46 
Hos.6¢ 


Hos.7! 15 
Hos.9¥% 
Hos.118/ 


Hos.10}!2 126 


Hos.78 
Hos.71/ 
Hos.87 
Hos.138 


25ff Mic.31-3 


Mic.15 
Mic.3}2 
Mic.27 
Mic.31! 


Mic.18 
Mic.35 
Mic.211 
Mic.3% 


Mic.38 
Is.61/ 
Ts.]25 

Is.126f 


Is.1022 
Is.3731 


30ff Is.2816 


358 
1- 3 
8-13 


Is.315 
Is.96 


PAGE LINES 


358 


31 
359 ! 


360 


361 


363 


364 


365 
a7 7 


19-21 
25-27 
28-30 

366 

3- 6 
10f 


Is.74 


Is.77 
Is.833 
Is.819 
Is.85-8 
Is.2211 


Is.1432 
Is.30 
Is.307 


Is.105 
Is.2915 
Is.289 


Ts.2810-18 
Is.2814 
Is.818 
Is.73 
Is.83 
Is.81 


Is.308 
Is.20¥F 
Is.73/f 
Is.393 
Is.3714f 


Zeph.1! 


Zeph.1 
Zeph.247 12 
13 


Zeph.3°/ 
Zeph.1¢ 
Zeph.1!? 


Zeph.3? 
Zeph.2° 


18ff Nah.2* 


367 
3-10 
13-17 
25f 
369 


ieee 
20-24 
370 
4— 7 
9-13 


371 
10f 
22f 


Nah.214 
Nah.3°% 
Nah.2!8 


Hab.1}2 
Hab.2!8 


Hab.2¥ 
Hab.24 


Jer.1! 
Jer.2?1 


451 


PAGE LINES 
371 
23-26 
26-28 


Jer.2}3 
Jer.314/f 


29f Jer.2%° 


372 
5- 7 


Jer.512 


29ff Jer.74-12 


373 
14 


Jer.7'4 


28ff Jer.313%4 


374 
5-10 
12-14 
14-23 
23-29 


19 


Jer.36 
Jer.1121 
Jer.20 
Jer.371F 


Jer.38 
Jer.3911-14 
Jer.20% 


Jer.1517 
Jer.9! 
Jer.1510 
Jer.2014 18 
Jer.1518 
Jer.12! 


Jer.209 151 


Gen.8?! 

1 Sam.26%9 
Am.5?! 

1 Sam.38 


23ff 1 Sam.1 


2 
22-24 


1 Sam.1433 


29f Jud.17¥/ 


393 
12-14 


14f 
15f 


22-24 


1 Sam.11% 
1 Sam.1454f 
1 Sam.1474 
1 Sam.1757 


26ff 1 Sam.2526/F 


394 
12 


5 
15-17 

396 
9-14 


397 
8-10 


Ex.23?? 

2 Sam.6° 

1 Sam.261% 
1 Ki.8 


30f Is.1% 


400 
8-12 


1 Ki.17?9 


REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES 


PAGE LINES 
401 

1 Kil 
2 Ki.11 


24f 
25-28 


402 
14-18 
22-27 
27-29 

403 
20-23 
29-27 
27-29 

404 
7-10 


12-16 


1 Ki.1l1¥% 
1 Ki.16°¥ 
2 Ki.1018// 


2 Kuli 
2 Ki.161° 
2 Ki.16? 


ef. 2 Ki.235 
2 Ki.18! 


26ff 2 Ki.21Y/ 
14f Gen.25/f 


407 


408 
10-12 
18-21 


1 Ki.18?! 
1 Ki.2117/ 


30f 2 Ki.113 


409 


of 


6-11 
11-13 
13 
13-16 
18-22 


Hos.14 

1 Ki.1918 
1 Ki.184 

2 Ki.27 

1 Ki.22 

2 Ki.101/ 


26ff Jer.350 
4-6 Am.97 


412 


PAGE LINES 


412 


Am.1f 
Is.10° 

Is.234 
Jer.275 


Am.97 
1 Ki.2219-22 


Hos.85 
Is.28 

2 Ki.184 
Ex.204/ 
Deut.127/ 


Is.812 


Am.47 
Am.36 
Jer.2515 
Jer.1424 
Is.63 
Is.239 
Is.63 


Hab.1)2f 
Jer.313 
Jer.319 


2 Sam.644 


PAGE LINES 
424, . 
27f Jer.31?9 

29ff Deut.2416 


(425 


16-21 

23-25 
27f 
29f 


Is.65 

Jer.179 
Hos.46 
Hos.6® 


Is.69f 
1s.2913f 
Is.25 


Is.313 
Is.301 


Jer.12! 
Jer.2913 
Jer.3133 
Jer.123 
Jer.247 


Deut.1214 
Deut.7§ 
Deut.614f 
Deut.7}8 


Deut.64 
Deut.65 





i 
i 


> 

Z 

aE 

ty e 
"|e 
ee oo 
ke 
=) 








DATE DUE 


Li} 


Ww Ww 





PRINTEDINU,S.A, 


GAYLORD 


oie by 
id 


ak si rN, 


& 


if } Me Miah ria 
4} hy \ a Ny es } 








